TCAgenda2024October281.Adoption of Agenda
2.Welcome and Introductions
3.Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study Draft
3.A.Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study Draft
4.Capital Improvement Plan Update
4.A.Capital Improvement Plan Update
5.County Project Updates
5.A.County Project Updates
6.Other
6.A.Veterans Road (Route 625) Paving Request
6.B.December Meeting Cancellation
AGENDA
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
MONDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2024
8:30 AM
FIRST-FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
FREDERICK COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
TC10-28-24EasternFrederickCountyTransportationStudy_Draft.pdf
TC10-28-24CapitalImprovementPlanUpdate.pdf
TC10-28-24CountyProjectUpdates.pdf
TC10-28-24Other.pdf
1
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: October 28, 2024
Agenda Section: Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study Draft
Title: Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study Draft
Attachments:
TC10-28-24EasternFrederickCountyTransportationStudy_Draft.pdf
2
3
FREDERICKCOUNTY
VA
WV
CLARKECOUNTY
WINCHESTER
SHENANDOAH COUNTY
WARREN COUNTY
STUDYAREA
WVEastern Frederick
County Transportation
Study (EFCTS)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 2
The following individuals and groups have been instrumental to this report:
Frederick County
including John Bishop, Wyatt Pearson, and Kayla Peloquin;
Virginia Department of Transportation
including Brad Reed;
McCormick Taylor
The lead consultant for the Eastern Frederick County Transportati on Study
(EFCTS)
Acknowledgments
5
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 3
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. As shown in Figure 1, the study area will
include 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 the purpose,
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.
The study team was aware of previous efforts to pursue a Route
37 east bypass around Winchester. A bypass was considered,
along with other transportation improvements, during the
conceptual solution development and analysis process. The goal
of the study is to develop a well-defined set of transportation
needs to be addressed by a fiscally implementable set of
transportation improvements. Additional recommendations,
such as land use or access management controls, will also be
included in the final plan. Additional alternatives analyses as
a part of a Phase II study will be required to further develop
alternatives to be viable for grant funding such as Smart Scale.Figure 1: Study Area
Study Overview
6
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 4
The Study Area is in the Urban Development Area (UDA) of Frederick County. To accommodate anti cipated residenti al
growth, this porti on of the County has been identi fi ed as the area where more intensive forms of residenti al development
will occur. While the UDA currently consists of primarily suburban residenti al types of development, with some multi family
units, parti cular areas have been identi fi ed to accommodate a more intensive mix of land uses and residenti al housing
opportuniti es.1
According to the Comprehensive Plan, Frederick County has grown signifi cantly in the past two decades in both populati on and
economic development. One of the contributors to the County’s populati on growth was the migrati on of people from inside of
the Washington Metropolitan Stati sti cal 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 locati on and excellent access to Northern Virginia and Washington,
D.C., has become a desirable place to live for those commuters. Frederick County has also become an att racti ve place to
live for reti rees. The UDA should allow for
housing that will meet the needs of fi rst-
ti me buyers, reti rees, move-up residents,
and seniors.2 While the Comprehensive
Plan does not state projected numbers for
the total populati on or jobs in 2035, the
Winchester/Frederick County Metropolitan
Planning Organizati on (WinFred MPO)
shared combined projecti ons for the City of
Winchester and Frederick County in their
Transportati on Plan 2040 (see Figure 2).
1 Frederick County, “Residenti al Development: Current Conditi ons”, Frederick County Comprehensive Plan
2 Frederick County, “Residenti al Development: Focus for the Future”, Frederick County Comprehensive Plan
Figure 2: Combined Projected Growth | Source: WinFred MPO Trasnsportati on Plan 2040
107,115
151,408
93,000
55,796
2015 2040
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
200,000 People Jobs
Demographics and Socioeconomics
7
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 5
Given the nature of the study area, a specifi c point was made to identi fy problems throughout as opposed to focusing solely
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 uti lity and would eff ecti vely 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 evaluati on of the most recent studies and existi ng comprehensive plan was
completed. Additi onally, conversati ons with staff at Frederick County Planning and VDOT helped to provide context and frame
these statements. A review of the PSI segments and intersecti ons was also conducted, and the needs statements refl ect
improvements proposed in that list. A thorough region wide travel demand model analysis was completed to determine
areas of traffi c growth in 2050 and origin and desti nati on 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 alternati ves to improve mobility and safety for all road users,
reduce congesti on, and enhance system conti nuity while meeti ng the needs of interstate, regional, and local traffi c passing
through and moving within the study area, including the evaluati on of the proposed Route 37 bypass.
Project Purpose & Need
The purpose and needs statements were included in a survey for public input and presented at a public
meeti ng, and the results are discussed in the following secti on.
8
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 6
Project Needs
Bicycle/Pedestrian
As indicated in the 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Update3, 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 (people who prefer to use walking
as their primary mode of transportation). 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 Strategically Targeted Affordable Roadway Solutions (STARS)
study in 2017 indicate that the average daily traffic (ADT) on this corridor is projected to reach 40,800 vehicles per day (VPD)
by 2047. There is a current System for the Management and Allocation of Resources for Transportation (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. In addition, two
segments of Route 7 within the study area fall within the 1.5 > V/C > 1.
• 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. The extension of Crossover Boulevard to US 17/50 has been identified in the Frederick County
Comprehensive Plan as an important connection and will offer improved access to the Virginia Inland Port.
3 NSVRC, WinFred MPO, Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update
9
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 7
• Large-scale residential land development on the study area’s southern end uses Warrior Drive and Tasker Road to access
I-81 and Route 37. Additional interstate or state route connectivity from Warrior Drive is critical to continue residential
development in this area and relieve congestion on Tasker Road. The Comprehensive plan includes a proposed link to
extend Warrior Drive to the proposed Route 37 alignment as a potential solution to redistribute traffic in this area.
Safety
Upon reviewing the VDOT crash data from 2017-2021 and the Top PSI intersections it also becomes apparent that there is a
significant safety issue on Route 7.
• 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 PSI priority by VDOT statewide. A SMART Scale project is in the design phase to
add capacity and reduce conflict points to a 0.52-mile segment of roadway in this crash cluster area, but 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.
• ADT on Route 7 Eastbound4: 14,000 VPD; Route 7 Westbound: 14,000 VPD; Total Crashes = 735; Fatal/Injury (FI)
Crashes = 176
• ADT on Route 11 Northbound5: 14,000 VPD; Route 11 Southbound: 14,000 VPD; Total Crashes = 347; FI = 71
• The study area includes 24 intersections and 15 segments in the Statewide VDOT 2017-2021 Top 100 PSI list.
• Six of the 15 segments are located on Route 7:
• Begin milepost (MP) 1.75, end MP 2.00: Total Crashes = 23; Fatal/Injury (FI) Crashes = 8 (VDOT District Rank 26)
4,5 ArcGIS, VDOT, https://vdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=a8da35dd9ce54993b25f64487c3717ec
10
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 8
• 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 Six Year Improvement Program (SYIP), with construction completed in 2026.
I-81 Needs – Identified in the I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan:
• While not specifically identified in the I-81 CIP and outside of the study area, improvements are warranted at the
intersection of I-81 Exit 307 to address safety and congestion. A project Pipeline study has been completed at this
interchange to identify cost effective solutions to address safety and congestion concerns.
• 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.
• A design concept was created for a diverging diamond interchange at Exit 317 to address congestion and safety.
11
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 9
The McCormick Taylor project team collaborated with VDOT, Frederick County, the City of Winchester, the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (NSVRC) and the WinFred 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 consistently 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 (revised November 2021). The draft Public Engagement Plan (PEP) was
shared with the public for review and comment and presented to Frederick County for implementation approval. The draft
Purpose and Needs statements were also shared with the public for review and comment and were overwhelmingly accepted
as depicted in Figure 17.
81
Draft Bicycle/Pedestrian Needs
Draft Purpose Statement
148 Purpose and Needs Statement Surveys Received
28 Additional Comments
139 (95%) agree with statements as presented
8 (5%) disagree with statements as presented
1 did not provide a response
Draft Congestion Needs Draft Interstate 81 Needs
79%
78 agree with statements as presented
21%
21 disagree with statements as presented
49 did not provide a response
91%
92 agree with statements as presented
9%
9 disagree with statements as presented
47 did not provide a response
88%
95 agree with statements as presented
12%
13 disagree with statements as presented
40 did not provide a response
86%
104 agree with statements as presented
14%
17 disagree with statements as presented
0 did not provide a response
Draft Safety Needs
Figure 17: Purpose & Needs Survey Results
Agency & Public Engagement
12
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 10
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.
The traffic model used 2019 as the base year and forecasted traffic volumes in
2050. Overall growth in Vehicle-miles Traveled (VMT) between 2019 and 2050
is 1.7% using a linear growth rate. This growth aligns with that in households
(1.2% per year) and external traffic (1.8% per year).
The study area was broken up into traffic analysis zones (TAZ’s) and an analysis
was completed to determine what the existing and future traffic patterns look
like between these zones. This analysis is included in the report in detail.
Another aspect of the analysis was to look at volume to capacity ratios (V/C).
V/C ratios provide a measurement of how well a facility can accommodate
traffic. For instance, a ratio of 0 indicates free flow traffic and a ratio of 1 or
greater indicates severe congestion. LOS is another metric used to describe
traffic flow used to symbolize the quality of traffic services. It is used to examine
highways by categorizing traffic flow and allocating quality levels based on
performances like speed, density, delay and many more. The key to an effective
LOS is the ability of a transportation system to provide safe and reliable service
for its users. LOS ranges from A (best quality of traffic/free flow of traffic) to F
(worst quality of traffic/breakdown of traffic flow). Frederick County ordinance
requires a minimum LOS C for transportation impact analyses (TIA’s) for new
development. Figure 11 shows the locations where the V/C ratio would exceed
0.85 (on roadways with LOS D or worse) in 2050.Figure 11: Locations Where V/C (LOS D) Ratio 0.85 ≥ in 2050 | Source: WRA
Traffic Analyses
13
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 11
Each segment of the original bypass was considered and an evaluati on completed. Detailed cost esti mates were not developed
for the original proposed four lane limited access confi gurati on but engineering judgement and comparable faciliti es were
used to develop costs referenced in this secti on of the report. Detailed work was completed to develop potenti al soluti ons to
address the needs noted earlier in the document. Refer to Figure 18 on for a map showing each of the following segments.
Bypass Segment 1 from Route 37 on the west side of I-81 to Route
11 includes a system interchange with Route 37 on the west and
a cloverleaf interchange with I-81. The cloverleaf interchange as
proposed would be diffi cult if not impossible to meet interchange
spacing requirements and would require signifi cant additi onal im-
provements on Interstate 81 and sideroads to meet current design
criteria. This segment had the least traffi c volume in the updated
travel demand model at approximately 13,000 VPD and it is the
most expensive segment of the original bypass. Engineering judge-
ment would lead to a cost of over half a billion dollars for that seg-
ment of the original bypass including the interchange with I-81 and
Route 37.
Bypass Segment 2 from Route 11 to Route 7 (Berryville Pike) at-
tracts about 18,000 VPD and is in an area of the study area that
is rapidly growing from both a residenti al and employment per-
specti ve. It would also allow some relief to Berryville Pike which
is one of the corridors with high V/C rati os in 2050. This segment
in the four-lane limited access confi gurati on would likely be over
$250 million dollars given the interchanges, right of way (ROW),
and structures required.
BYPASSSEGMENT-1
BYPASSSEGMENT-2
BYPASSSEGMENT-3
BYPASSSEGMENT-4
BYPASSSEGMENT-5
Berryville Pike
Berryvill
e
A
v
e Welltown RdWyck S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSenseny
R
d
Senseny
R
d Haggerty BlvdE C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdWarrior DrTasker RdTasker R
d
Old CharlesTownRd
FairmountAveFortCollierRdSnowdenBridge R d
Park
Jim Barnett
ParkIzaacWalton
Club
Country
Winchester
Course
GolfValley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester
17
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81
11
11
11
7 7
7
37
81
S U N N Y S I D E
E S TAT E S
FA IR WAY
H E I G H T S
B UF F L IC K
S O U T H V I E WWESTWOOD
MI L L S
PA R K I N S
H E I G H T S
S E N S E N Y
H E IG H TS
M I L L E R
PA R K
C O L L E G E
HILLS
SHENAND OAH
S P R I N G S
J O R D A N
FA C TO RY
B U R N T
S P R I N G
VA L L E Y
H E I G HT S
G R E E N W OO D
K N O LL S
B U R N I N G
0 10.50.25
MilesN
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY
www.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation
Original Route 37 Bypass | Segments
Figure 18: Original Bypass Segments
Berryville PikeBerryville Ave Welltown RdWyck St Woods Mill RdValley Mill RdGreenwood RdSenseny Rd Senseny RdE Cork St Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdTasker RdTasker R
d
Old CharlesTownRdFairmountAveFortCollierRdParkJimBarnett
Park
Izaac Walton
ClubCountryWinchesterCourseGolfValleyCarper'sRegional AirportWinchester 84,80013,40011,400 18,30028,10021,50013,40021,7009,000 21,20024,400
26,10026,70049,8
0
083,600102,20017
1717522522522
522
8181 81 1111117 7 73781
0 10.50.25
MilesN
Legend
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
The average number of vehicles that use this road in a day.
Volume to Capacity Ratio (V/C)
The volume of vehicles a given road can handle at a time.
A higher number (greater than 1.50) means the demand
for road space is higher than its capacity, thus causing
excessive traffic delays and congestion.
Less than 0.85
0.85 to 1.00
1.00 to 1.50
Greater than 1.50
#####
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTYwww.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation Projected Traffic in 2050 | With Bypass
Original Route 37 Bypass Assessment
14
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 12
Bypass Segment 3 from Route 7, Berryville Pike to US 17/50
(Millwood Pike) is a link through relati vely undeveloped land
and may increase sprawl and encourage development that
is not desirable. This segment of the original bypass att racts
approximately 22,000 VPD in 2050 but has less independent
value as it relates to the needs identi fi ed in this study. This
segment would also likely cost over $200 million in the prior
confi gurati on. The segment from Berryville Pike to Senseny
Road has more value and could reduce traffi c on Senseny
Road and Greenwood Road and provide an alternati ve to
Route 7 Berryville Pike. The segment south of Senseny Road
to Millwood Pike traverses signifi cant topography and an al-
ternati ves analysis would be recommended to fi nd the best
and most economically feasible route.
Bypass Segment 4 from US 17/50 (Millwood Pike) to US
522 (Front Royal Pike) is another link through relati vely
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 connecti ons to Papermill
and Airport Road/Crossover Boulevard for future relief. This
segment would also likely cost over $200 million dollars in the
prior confi gurati on and would att ract approximately 26,000
VPD in the 2050 forecast.
BYPASSSEGMENT-1 BYPASSSEGMENT-2
BYPASSSEGMENT-3
BYPASSSEGMENT-4
BYPASSSEGMENT-5
Berryville Pike
Berryvil
l
e
A
v
e Welltown RdW
y
c
k
S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSensen
y
R
d
Senseny
R
d Haggerty BlvdE C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdWarrior DrTasker RdTasker
R
d
Old CharlesTownRd
FairmountAveFortCollierRdSnowdenBridge R d
ParkJimBarnett
Park
Izaac Walton
Club
CountryWinchester
CourseGolf
Valley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester
17
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81 11
11
11
7 7
7
37
81
S U NN Y S I DE
E S TAT E S
FAI RWAY
H EIG HTS
B UFFL I CK
S O U T H V I E WWESTWOOD
MI LL S
PARK IN S
H EI G H T S
S E N S E N Y
H E IG H T S
M I L LE R
PA R K
C O L L E G E
HILLS
SHENANDOAH
S P R I NG SJORDAN
FA C T O RY
B U R N T
S PR I N GVALLEY
HEI GH T S
G REE N W OO D
K NO L L S
B U RN I N G
0 10.50.25
MilesN
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTYwww.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation Original Route 37 Bypass | Segments
Figure 18: Original Bypass Segments
Berryville Pi
k
eBerryvill
e
A
v
e Welltown RdWyck S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSenseny Rd
Senseny
R
d
E C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdTasker RdTasker R
d
Old CharlesTownRd
FairmountAveFortCollierRdPark
Jim Barnett
ParkIzaacWalton
Club
CountryWinchester
Course
Golf
Valley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester 84,80013,40011,400
1
8
,
3
0
0
28,100
21,5
0
0
13,400
21,7009,000 21,20024,400
26,10026,70049,8
0
083,600102,20017
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81 11
11
11
7 7
7
37
81
0 10.50.25
MilesN
Legend
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
The average number of vehicles that use this road in a day.
Volume to Capacity Ratio (V/C)
The volume of vehicles a given road can handle at a time.
A higher number (greater than 1.50) means the demand
for road space is higher than its capacity, thus causing
excessive traffic delays and congestion.
Less than 0.85
0.85 to 1.00
1.00 to 1.50
Greater than 1.50
#####
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTYwww.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation Projected Traffic in 2050 | With Bypass
15
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 13
Bypass Segment 5 from US 522 (Front Royal Pike) to I-81/Tasker
Road is the most southern secti on of the original Route 37
bypass and att racts a signifi cant amount of traffi c both in the
total bypass confi gurati on and independently by itself in the
2050 travel demand model. It is a costly segment in the original
confi gurati on and also in the new alternate confi gurati on due to
number of structures and wetland/fl oodplain impact. It does,
however, provide for addressing congesti on needs in this area
and a future connecti on to Warrior Drive. The segment of the
bypass between Tasker Road and the Warrior Drive extension
is forecasted to have about 50,000 VPD and would require a
four-lane typical secti on; the capacity of a two-lane roadway
with minimal access points is approximately 23,000 to 29,000
VPD. From the Warrior Drive extension to US 17/50, a two-lane
roadway would be suffi cient for the 2050 forecasted demand
of approximately 27,000 VPD. Using a maximum of 29,000 VPD
capacity for a two-lane roadway as a guide, each segment of
the Route 37 bypass would be suffi ciently served in 2050 with
a two-lane roadway, except for the segment between Tasker
Road and the Warrior Drive extension which would warrant a
four-lane highway based on projected volumes.
Using a maximum of 29,000 VPD capacity for a two-lane roadway as a guide, each segment of the Route 37 bypass would
be suffi ciently served in 2050 with a two-lane roadway, except for the segment between Tasker Road and the Warrior Drive
extension which would warrant a four-lane highway based on projected volumes.
BYPASSSEGMENT-1 BYPASSSEGMENT-2
BYPASSSEGMENT-3
BYPASSSEGMENT-4
BYPASSSEGMENT-5
Berryville Pike
Berryvil
l
e
A
v
e Welltown RdW
y
c
k
S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSensen
y
R
d
Senseny
R
d Haggerty BlvdE C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdWarrior DrTasker RdTasker
R
d
Old CharlesTownRdFairmountAve
FortCollierRdSnowdenBridge R d
Park
Jim Barnett
Park
Izaac Walton
Club
Country
Winchester
Course
Golf
ValleyCarper's
Regional Airport
Winchester
17
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81 111111
7 7
7
37
81
S U NN Y S I DE
E S TAT E S
FAI RWAY
H EIG HTS
B UFFL I CK
S O U T H V I E WWESTWOOD
MI LL S
PARK IN S
H EI G H T S
S E N S E N Y
H E IG H T S
M I L LE R
PA R K
C O L L E G E
HILLS
SHENANDOAH
S P R I NG SJORDANFACTORYBURNTSPRINGVALLEY
HEI GH T S
G REE N W OO D
K NO L L S
B U RN I N G
0 10.50.25
MilesN
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTYwww.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation Original Route 37 Bypass | Segments
Figure 18: Original Bypass Segments
Berryville Pi
k
eBerryvill
e
A
v
e Welltown RdWyck S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood Rd
Senseny Rd
Senseny
R
d
E C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdTasker RdTasker R
d
Old CharlesTownRdFairmountAve
FortCollierRdPark
Jim Barnett
ParkIzaacWalton
Club
CountryWinchester
Course
Golf
Valley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester 84,80013,40011,400 18,300
28,100
21,5
0
0
13,400
21,7009,000 21,20024,400
26,10026,70049,8
0
083,600102,20017
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81 111111
7 7
7
37
81
0 10.50.25
MilesN
Legend
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
The average number of vehicles that use this road in a day.
Volume to Capacity Ratio (V/C)
The volume of vehicles a given road can handle at a time.
A higher number (greater than 1.50) means the demand
for road space is higher than its capacity, thus causing
excessive traffic delays and congestion.
Less than 0.85
0.85 to 1.00
1.00 to 1.50
Greater than 1.50
#####
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTYwww.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation Projected Traffic in 2050 | With Bypass
16
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 14
Concept Development & Potential Solutions
Formulation of different concepts and solutions were centered around the needs identified and presented to the public.
The Partial Limited Access Concept is defined by the following characteristics as defined in VDOTs Roadway Design Manual:
provides access to select public roads, crossings at grade, and some private driveway connections. Project cost summaries
for the following Potential Improvement Projects are shown on Figure 19 on page 15 and summarized in Table 13 on page
16.
Taking the conglomerate dataset of the public feedback, the 2050 forecasted volumes and V/C ratios, and analysis of the
sections of the Route 37 bypass from the 2001 EIS, the following concepts were formulated and proposed to the public in
March 2024 for feedback. This study focused on providing cost-effective alternatives and volume appropriate solutions to
address the 2050 forecasted volumes. This includes a look at the sections of the Route 37 Bypass to determine if a two-lane
partial limited access roadway in lieu of a four-lane highway full limited access could adequately meet future needs.
Included in the following discussion are findings from the analysis of Potential Projects 1, 3 and 4 and design considerations
that were considered or warrant further analysis. The alignments from the Route 37 bypass in the 2001 EIS and UPC 85972
Study Update were used as a basis for these discussions. Since 2001, there has been land development which occurred
either in or in proximity to these alignments. The following paragraphs discuss some of the challenges which warrant further
analysis during a potential preliminary engineering phase.
17
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 15
Potenti al Improvement Project 1: Route 37 extension from
Route 11 to Route 7 as a two-lane parti al limited access
roadway (anti cipated Major Collector).
Potenti al Improvement Project 2: Widening Airport Road
from its current confi gurati on of two lanes to four lanes
between US 522 and Admiral Byrd Drive (anti cipated Major
Collector) to help alleviate congesti on (1 > V/C > 0.85) entering
the Airport from I-81.
Potenti al Improvement Project 3: Tasker Road/Route 37 to
US 522 (anti cipated Major Collector/Minor Arterial) as a full
limited access highway from Tasker Road/Route 37 to Warrior
Drive and parti al limited access roadway from Warrior Drive
to US 522.
Potenti al Improvement Project 4: This project entails the
extension of Haggerty Boulevard/Hallowed Crossings Way
(anti cipated Major Collector).
Potenti al Improvement Project 5: This proposed improvement
includes the additi on of a center turn lane to Senseny Road
between I-81 and Greenwood Road.
1
2
5
4
3
MAJOR
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
MAJOR COL
L
E
C
T
O
R
/
MINOR ART
E
R
I
A
L MAJOR COLLECTORMAJORCOLLECTOR
MAJ
O
R
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
Berryville Pike
Berryvil
l
e
A
v
e Welltown RdW
y
c
k
S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSensen
y
R
d
Senseny
R
d Haggerty BlvdE C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdWarrior DrTasker RdTasker
R
d
Old CharlesTownRd
FairmountAveFortCollierRdSnowden
Bridge R d
Park
Jim Barnett
Park
Izaac Walton
Club
Country
Winchester
Course
Golf
Valley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester
SU NNY SID E
ES TATE S
FA I RWAY
HEIG HT SBUFFLICK
S OUT HV I E WWESTWOOD
M ILLS
PARKINS
HEI GHTS
S ENSE N Y
HEIGHTS
M I LLE R
PARK
CO LLEGE
HILLS
SHENANDOAH
SP R IN GS
J OR DA N
FA CTORY
B UR NT
SPRI N G
VA L LE Y
H EI GHTS
GREE NWOOD
KNOLLS
B UR NING
0 10.50.25
MilesN
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY
www.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation
Concept Development | Proposed Solutions
17
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81
11
11
11
7 7
7
37
81
Figure 19: Potenti al Improvement Projects
18
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 16
✓
The cost estimate summary can be found in Table 13.
These planning level estimates included the following assumptions:
Drainage/Stormwater Management (SWM)/Erosion and Sedimentation Control (ESC) is 25% of the subtotal of major
roadway quantities
Utilities is 3% of the subtotal of major roadway quantities
Signal Performance Measures (SPM)/Maintenance of Traffic (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
ROW is 5% of the construction subtotal
Construction Engineering & Inspection (CEI) is 17.5% of the construction subtotal
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Planning Level Cost Estimates
Table 13: Construction Cost Estimate – Side-By-Side Costs
May 2024 Inflation Increase of 5% Compounded Each Year
Project #Project Total With Contingencies (millions)2025 (millions)2026 (millions)2027 (millions)2028 (millions)2029 (millions)
1 $179.5 $188.5 $198 $208 $218 $229
3 $13.5 $14 $15 $16 $17 $17.5
2 $196 $206 $216 $227 $238.5 $250
4 $49 $51.5 $54 $56.5 $59.5 $62.5
5 $25.5 $27 $28 $29.5 $31 $33
TOTAL $463.5 $487 $511 $537 $564 $592
19
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 17
In addition to searching for grant opportunities to fund the potential solutions proposed, this study can be used in many ways.
Reviewing the information provided in this study to re-calibrate the thought process behind the necessity of constructing the
Route 37 Eastern bypass is an important one. Consideration should be made to update the Comprehensive Transportation
Plan/Eastern Frederick County Road Plan to show that a two-lane roadway can meet the future transportation needs in certain
segments of the bypass. Additionally, consider adding the other proposed improvements in this study to support long term
transportation planning goals to increase mobility and safety for the residents of Frederick County and the traveling public.
Examples include capacity preservation on US 522 and US 17/50 as this intersection and segments/intersections along US
522 were identified on VDOT’s Top PSI list. As development increases in Frederick County, these areas of preservation should
receive special attention and consideration.
It is also a recommendation to find a mechanism to ensure that future development will not interfere with projects included
in the Transportation Plan. As noted previously, sections of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass will not be constructable on the
alignment scoped in the 2001 EIS due to development that has occurred since. Consider asking developers to provide a GIS
layer with the proposed footprint to avoid these conflicts in the future.
This study is intended to precipitate a Phase II analysis to fully vet the alternatives so that the County and Commonwealth
make the best-informed decisions possible with tax funds. As noted in the section above, SMART SCALE applications in the 6th
round now require the following for roadways on new alignments: “Provide a Planning Study/Safety Study, which includes an
operational analysis and documents a preferred alternative that is consistent with the scope described in the application to
support this feature. The study must include an alternatives analysis that considers improvements not on a new alignment”
(https://smartscale.virginia.gov/media/smartscale/documents/508_R6_Technical-Guide_FINAL_FINAL_acc043024_PM.pdf,
Table 2.6). It was not within this study’s scope to do this detailed analysis for the proposed roadways on new alignment;
therefore, a Phase II is necessary to enable the County to apply for SMART SCALE funding in the future.
Next Steps
20
Eastern Frederick
County Transportation
Study (EFCTS)
MAY 2024
FREDERICKCOUNTY
VA
WV
CLARKECOUNTY
WINCHESTER
SHENANDOAH COUNTY
WARREN COUNTY
STUDYAREA
WV
21
INTRODUCTION
Study Overview
Project Purpose
PAST & CURRENT STUDIES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Environmental Overview
Traffic Analyses
PROJECT NEEDS
AGENCY & PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Pulic Engagement Plan Overview
Stakeholder Identification
Public Meetings
Community Context Audit
LOGICAL TERMINI, INDEPENDENT UTILITY, & CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
Logical Termini & Independent Utility
Original Route 37 Bypass Assessment
Concept Development
GRANT OPPORTUNITIES & NEXT STEPS
APPENDICES
5
5
6
7
11
11
18
33
36
36
38
38
41
44
44
45
47
58
60
Table of Contents
22
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 3
The following individuals and groups have been instrumental to this report:
Frederick County
including John Bishop, Wyatt Pearson, and Kayla
Peloquin;
Virginia Department of Transportation
including Brad Reed;
McCormick Taylor
The lead consultant for the Eastern Frederick County
Transportati on Study (EFCTS).
Acknowledgments
23
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 4
ACS American Community Survey
ADT Average Daily Traffic
CBD Central Business District
CEI Construction Engineering and
Inspection
CLV Critical Lane Volume
CMS Changeable Message Sign
EDA Economic Development Authority
EFCTS Eastern Frederick County
Transportation Study
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EJScreen Environmental Justice Screen
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESC Erosion and Sedimentation
Control
FI Fatal/Injury
GIS Geographic Information System
I-81 Interstate 81
iCAP Interchange Control Assessment
Program
LOS Level of Service
MP Milepost
MOT Maintenance of Traffic
MPO Metropolitan Planning
Organization
NSVRC Northern Shenandoah Valley
Regional Commission
NTP Notice to Proceed
PEP Public Engagement Plan
PSI Potential for Safety Improvement
RMSE Root Mean Square Error
ROD Record of Decision
ROW Right of Way
SCALE
Safety, Congestion reduction,
Accessibility, Land use, and
Economic development and the
Environment
SS4A Safe Streets for All
SAAA Shenandoah Area Agency on
Aging
SMART
System for the Management
and Allocation of Resources for
Transportation
SPF Safety Performance Function
SPM Signal Performance Measure
STARS Strategically Targeted Affordable
Roadway Solutions
SWM Stormwater Management
SYIP Six Year Improvement Plan
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zones
TIA Transportation Impact Analysis
UDA Urban Development Area
USACE United States Army Corps of
Engineers
USDOT United States Department of
Transportation
VADEQ Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality
V/C Volume to Capacity
VDOT Virginia Department of
Transportation
VHSIP Virginia Highway Safety
Improvement Program
VJuST VDOT’s Junction Screening Tool
VMT Vehicle-miles Traveled
VPD Vehicles per Day
VWP Virginia Water Protection
WinFred Winchester/Frederick County
WMSA Washington Metropolitan
Statistical Area
WRA Whitman, Requardt and
Associates, LLP
Acronyms
24
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 5
Figure 1: Study Area
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. As shown in Figure 1,
the study area will 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 funding
transportation improvements in the study area.
25
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 6
Board of Supervisors Vision Statement
“Ensuring the quality of life of all Frederick County Citizens by preserving the past
and planning for the future through sound fiscal management.”
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 set of transportation needs to be addressed by a
fiscally implementable set of transportation improvements. Additional recommendations,
such as land use or access management controls, will also be included in the final plan.
Additional alternatives analyses as a part of a Phase II study will be required to further
develop alternatives to be viable for grant funding such as Smart Scale.
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.
26
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 7
Past & Current Studies
Route 37 Bypass- Final EIS and UPC 85972 Study Updates
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Route 37 east bypass and existing
Record of Decision (ROD) was completed in 2001 and 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 was 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 met those projections to
date and the five-year validity of those forecasts have rendered the EIS and ROD unusable.
In 2010-2013, there was a Route 37 Eastern Bypass Study (UPC 85972) which updated
the prior ROD. Modifications were made to the prior alignments to upgrade and address
geometry concerns. The resulting alignments continued the divided highway concept
with interchanges. The work from this study was incorporated into the Frederick County
Comprehensive Plan.
Frederick County US 11 to SR 7 Connector Technical Memo
Frederick County requested assistance from VDOT Staunton District Planning in assessing
the pros and cons of a more direct connection between US 11 and SR 7 as it compares
to existing route options. The analysis looked at existing data to identify needs prior to
providing two alternatives. While this memo is a great starting point, there needs to be a
more formal study/alternatives analysis completed for any alternatives to be eligible for
SMART SCALE funding.
Route 7 STARS Corridor Study
The study of the Route 7 Strategically Targeted Affordable Roadway Solutions (STARS)
corridor 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, and certain improvements have advanced
through other funding means. Traffic problems along this corridor are expected to
continue.
27
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 8
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 the
nation’s infrastructure. Within Virginia, I-81 connects 30 colleges and universities, 21 cities
and towns, and 13 counties. It 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 the region. The 325-
mile corridor spans three Virginia Department of Transportation (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 Virginia1. This study was used as information only and referenced
for problems identified during the course of the Eastern Frederick County Transportation
Study (EFCTS) project. The I-81 Corridor Improvement Program is advancing independently
and will address several problems identified by the public during the EFCTS project.
Frederick County Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan is the guide for the future growth of Frederick County. The latest
version was adopted on November 10, 2021, by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors.
Information from this Plan was used as input into this study.
1 VDOT, “What is the I-81 Corridor Improvement Program”, Improve 81, https://improve81.vdot.virginia.gov/
28
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 9
Serial Title Agency & Year of
Publication
1 Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan-Proposed Lane Divide Frederick County, 2022
2 The 2035 Comprehensive Plan Assessment Need Frederick County, 2017
3 Fredrick County Primary & Secondary Road Improvement Plan Frederick County, 2022
4 VDOT Staunton District Planning-2019 VDOT, 2019
5 North Winchester Area Safety and Operational Analysis Report WinFred MPO, 2020
6 Route 7 STARS Corridor Study VDOT, 2021
7 US-522 Realignment Study NSVRC/WinFred MPO, 2022
8 2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan VDOT, 2010
9 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan WinFred MPO, 2022
11 Frederick County ArcGIS REST Services Frederick County
12 PSI Top 100 Segments and Intersections VDOT, 2023
Table 1: Studies and Other References Reviewed
Potential Sites Identified by Other Studies
There are multiple simultaneous efforts and studies occurring within Frederick County as
captured in Table 1. To gain a complete picture of the areas of concern in the County and
what has been studied to date, these items were all evaluated.
Table 2 shows the sites in the study area with potential improvement scopes or known
transportation issues as reported in prior studies. It also shows whether they were noted
by stakeholders, the road classification, and if 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
project has been studied for installing partial median U-turn intersections and US 17/50
widening. Notable plans tested or considered for the remaining roads include Redbud
Road realignment, realigning US 522 near US 50 to mitigate congestion, and adding turn
lanes at the intersection of Senseny Road and Crestleigh Drive.
29
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 10
Location Studies
Covered
Noted by
Stakeholders
2050
V/C >1
Major
Collector
Improved
Major
Collector
Minor
Collector
Improved
Minor
Collector
Minor
Arterial
PSI
Intersections
PSI
Segment
US-11/
Martinsburg
Pike
8 12 ✓✓6
I-81 Exit
313 Bridge/
Millwood
Pike/US 50
7 10 ✓✓3 ✓
I-81 Exit 317
and Redbud
Road
6 13 ✓
Route 7/
Berryville Pike 5 12 ✓✓9 ✓
US 522/Front
Royal Pike
Near US-50
5 3 2 ✓
Snowden
Bridge 4 2 ✓
Senseny Road 4 4 ✓✓2 ✓
Warrior Drive 3 3 ✓1
Parkins Mill
Road 2 0 ✓
Papermill
Road 2 0 ✓
Old Charles
Town Road 2 1 ✓✓1
Tasker Road 2 1 ✓✓1 ✓
lnverlee Way
Extension 1 0
Getty Lane 1 0 ✓
Valley Mill
Road 1 2 ✓
Farmington
Boulevard 1 0 ✓
Highcliffe
Drive 1 0 ✓
Coverstone
Drive 1 0 ✓
Prince
Frederick
Drive
1 0 ✓
Crossover
Blvd 1 1 ✓
Table 2 : Roads That Showed Up in Past Studies | Sources: Frederick County, NSVRC, VDOT, WinFred MPO
30
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 11
Location Studies
Covered
Noted by
Stakeholders
2050 V/C
>1
Major
Collector
Improved Major
Collector
Minor
Collector
Improved
Minor
Collector
Minor
Arterial
PSI
Intersections
PSI
Segment
Independence
Drive 1 0 ✓
Coldwell Lane 1 0 ✓
White Oak
Road 1 1 ✓
Brabant Drive 1 0 ✓
Fox Drive 1 0
East Tevis
Street 1 0
Sulphur Spring
Road 1 0
North
Frederick Pike 1 0 1 ✓
North
Pleasant
Valley Road
1 0 2 ✓
Greenwood
Road 1 3 ✓2 ✓
Martin Drive 0 0 ✓
Macedonia
Church Road 0 0 ✓
Table 2 (Continued): Roads That Showed Up in Past Studies | Sources: Frederick County, NSVRC, VDOT, WinFred MPO
31
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 12
Existing Conditions
Environmental Overview
Demographics & Socioeconomics
The Study Area is primarily located within the Urban Development Area (UDA) of Frederick
County. To accommodate anti cipated residenti al growth, this porti on of the County has
been identi fi ed as the area where more intensive forms of residenti al development
will occur. While the UDA currently consists of primarily suburban residenti al types
of development, with some multi family units, parti cular areas have been identi fi ed to
accommodate a more intensive mix of land uses and residenti al housing opportuniti es.2
Due to the suburban-style of development within the Study Area, the transportati on
network is primarily auto-centric. Public transit is currently unavailable within Frederick
County; however, the County has recently parti cipated in the Winchester/Frederick County
(WinFred) Metropolitan Planning Organizati on (MPO) Transit Feasibility Study to determine
how this can be improved. Dedicated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure are currently
limited within the study area as well; however, are encouraged in the Comprehensive
Plan for new development and retrofi ts where logical. Goal 1 in the Community Benefi ts
Secti on of the Comprehensive Plan is “to promote the development of new roadways and
the redevelopment of existi ng roadways in a manner that makes them open, available,
and safe to all modes of transportati on.” Regarding parks access, another goal is “to have
every resident of Frederick County’s UDA within walking or biking distance of a recreati on
area.” These goals illustrate the sincere commitment by the County to increase walking
and biking in their community.
According to the Comprehensive Plan, Frederick County has grown signifi cantly in the
past two decades in both populati on and economic development. One of the contributors
to the County’s populati on growth was the migrati on of people from inside of the
Washington Metropolitan Stati sti cal 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 locati on and excellent access to Northern Virginia and Washington, D.C., has become
a desirable place to live for those commuters. Frederick County has also become an
att racti ve place to live for reti rees. The UDA should allow for housing that will meet the
needs of fi rst-ti me buyers, reti rees, move-up residents, and seniors.3
2 Frederick County, “Residenti al Development: Current Conditi ons”, Frederick County Comprehensive Plan 3 Frederick County, “Residenti al Development: Focus for the Future”, Frederick County Comprehensive Plan
32
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 13
Means of Transportati on to Work Percent
Drove Alone 81.10%
Carpooled 8.80%
Public Transportati on (Excluding TaxiCab) 0.30%
Walked 1.10%
Bicycle 0.10%
Taxicab, Motorcycle, or Other Means 0.80%
Worked From Home 7.80%
Table 3: Frederick County Journey to Work Source: American Census Survey 2021
107,115
151,408
93,000
55,796
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 2015 2040
Figure 2: Combined Projected Growth | Source: WinFred MPO Trasnsportati on Plan 2040
200,000 People Jobs
While the Comprehensive Plan does not state projected numbers for the total populati on
or jobs in 2035, the WinFred MPO shared combined projecti ons for the City of Winchester
and Frederick County in their Transportati on Plan 2040 (see Figure 2). Growth in populati on
and employment will conti nue to place signifi cant demands on the transportati on system.
As stated in the Comprehensive Plan, studies performed by the Economic Development
Authority (EDA) have shown that Frederick County remains primarily an in-commute
locati on. Frederick County is also home to a large populati on of residents that commute
out of the County for employment. According to the U.S. Census, 89.90% of County workers
aged 16 years and over drive to work with an average commute ti me of 33 minutes,
compared to 75% of Virginian workers aged 16 years and over with an average commute
ti me of 25 minutes. See Table 3 for the means of transportati on uti lized to travel to work
in Frederick County.
33
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 14
According to the US Census Bureau On The Map tool:
• 31,895 people live within Frederick County but are employed outside of the
County.
• 18,810 people are employed within Frederick County, but live outside of the
County.
• 9,460 people are employed and live within Frederick County.
Figure 3: Workers in Frederick County | Source: US Census Bureau, On the Map
Refer to Figure 3 for a depiction of where workers who are employed in Frederick County
live.
34
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 15
Figure 4: Frederick County Low-Income Populations | Source: US EPA EJScreen
Using the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Environmental Justice
Screen (EJScreen), low-income populations (see Figure 4) and populations over the age of
64 (see Figure 5) were analyzed. EJScreen uses American Community Survey (ACS) 2021
5-year estimate data. The low-income populations and populations over the age of 64
in 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 population over age of 64.
35
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 16
Figure 5: Frederick County Populations Over 64 | Source: US EPA EJScreen
Owning and maintaining a car costs about $12,000 annually4. 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. 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 the 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 to better accommodate seniors.
Natural Resources
An important component of reviewing transportation alternatives is the analysis of
impacted natural resources. This can help guide the alternatives process and identify less
impactful solutions.
4 American Automobile Association, Your Driving Costs, 2023
36
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 17
Layer Source Metadata or Service URL
1. Existing County Parks
Frederick County
VA GIS
https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_Planning/Planning_CIP/MapServer/3
2. Streams https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_GIS/FrederickCountyGIS/MapServer/23
3. Ponds https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_GIS/FrederickCountyGIS/MapServer/25
4. Lakes https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_GIS/FrederickCountyGIS/MapServer/24
5. Floodplains https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_GIS/FrederickCountyGIS/MapServer/20
6. Community Park https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_Planning/Planning_CIP/MapServer/4
7. Park Trails https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_Planning/Planning_CIP/MapServer/6
8. Conservation Easement https://fredcogis.fcva.us/maps/rest/services/
FC_GIS/FrederickCountyGIS/MapServer/34
9. Wetlands
US Fish & Wildlife
Web Mapping
Services
https://fwspublicservices.wim.usgs.gov/wet-
landsmapservice/rest/services/Wetlands/Map-
Server/0
10. Human Geography Basemap ESRI https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.htm-
l?id=3582b744bba84668b52a16b0b6942544
Table 4: Natural Resources Native Source Data
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the USEPA are the federal agencies
which regulate watercourses (streams) 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, VADEQ is also tasked with protecting wetlands and streams 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. These layers were imported into a custom webmap that was created for this
project to provide many of the graphics in this report.
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
37
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 18
Figure 6: Natural Resources | Source: Frederick County, Virginia Open Source Date
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 best management practices are
retaining walls, using box or pipe
culverts where possible, steepening
of bank slopes, and usage of
wingwalls or abutments to decrease
the footprint.
Due to the quantity of streams in
the study area, wetland impacts
would also be anticipated. Using
the existing Geographic Information
System (GIS) layers available, a
minimum of about 5 acres (about
twice the area of a Manhattan
city block) of wetland impacts are
anticipated. Wetland delineation
occurs as part of the preliminary
engineering process for each project.
If temporary wetland impacts occur,
they would be restored to pre-
construction conditions, succeeding
construction, to the maximum extent possible. This would include re-seeding, 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 on
the previous page and in Figure 6 on this page.
38
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 19
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 information available for the timeframe of the study. The network and
traffic analysis zones (TAZs) structure was also modified to include roadway improvements
through 2019. In addition, updated future year demographics were 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.
The traffic model used 2019 as the base year and forecasted traffic volumes in 2050.
Overall growth in vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) between 2019 and 2050 is 1.7% using a
linear growth rate. This growth aligns with that in households (1.2% per year) and external
traffic (1.8% per year).
The study area was broken up into TAZs and an analysis was completed to determine
what the existing and future traffic patterns look like between these zones. This analysis
is included in the report in detail. Another aspect of the analysis was to look at volume
to capacity (V/C) ratios. V/C ratios provide a measurement of how well a facility can
accommodate traffic. For instance, a ratio of 0 indicates free flow traffic and a ratio of 1
or greater indicates severe congestion. Level of service (LOS) is another metric used to
describe traffic flow used to symbolize the quality of traffic services. It is used to examine
highways by categorizing traffic flow and allocating quality levels based on performances
like speed, density, delay and many more. The key to an effective LOS is the ability of a
transportation system to provide safe and reliable service for its users. LOS ranges from A
(best quality of traffic/free flow of traffic) to F (worst quality of traffic/breakdown of traffic
flow). Frederick County ordinance requires a minimum LOS C for transportation impact
analyses (TIAs) for new development.
39
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 20
Variable 2019 2050
Population 119,846 167,159
Households 48,485 67,063
Workers 64,562 87,110
Vehicles 97,955 131,849
High Traffic Retail Employment 7,152 9,487
Industrial Employment 16,560 25,265
Office Employment 5,422 6,786
Retail Employment 6,062 8,151
Service Employment 19,734 26,849
Employment 54,930 83,410
Table 5: Zonal Demographic Totals | Source: MPO
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. Streetlight uses big data analytics to
estimate travel patterns between geometric zones.
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. The newest demographic
data (recently updated by the County)
was used with the existing VDOT model
so that results were as accurate as
possible. VDOT is undertaking a more
robust update of the entire model, but it
was not yet available for this study. Results from this study can be validated against that
update in the future. The zonal data based on new zone splits the MPO has developed is
shown in Table 5. The new zonal splits are shown in Figure 7 on the following page. 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 7.
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 new roadway connection (completed between 2015 and 2019) added
was Crossover Boulevard.
40
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 21
Figure 7: Changes in Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) | Source: Whitman, Requardt and Associates, LLP (WRA)
Roadway Type Percent Error
2015 2019 Target
Freeway 3 3.6 +/-7
Major Arterial -2.1 8.8 +/- 10
Minor Arterial -4.7 18.9 +/- 15
Collector & Local 2.7 22.5 +/- 20
Total 2 6.34 +/- 5
Table 6: Percent Error by Roadway Type Source: VDOT
Volume Group Percent RMSE
2015 2019 Target
0 - 5000 29.09 38.2 100
5000 - 10000 25.36 38.2 45
10000 - 20000 19 64 17.2 35
20000 - 50000 6.81 11 8 27
Total 19.12 18.4 40
Table 7: Percent RMSE by Volume Group Source: VDOT
Validating 2019 Model
To make sure the model was performing as expected, the 2019 model results were
evaluated against 2019 counts from VDOT’s database. The percentage error by roadway
type and percent root mean square error (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.
41
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 22
Table 8: VMT by Facility Type | Source: WRA
Facility Type 2019 2050
Interstate 1 1,438,063 2,233,955
Minor Freeway 2 244,691 413,828
Primary Arterial 4 936,733 1,410,431
Major Arterial 5 541,897 800,128
Minor Arterial 6 697,129 1,133,993
Major Collector 7 130,600 197,644
Minor Collector 8 249,523 395,627
Ramp 10 91,349 122,719
Centroid Connector 11 419,922 581,949
External 12 210,209 348,358
TOTAL 4,960,116 7,638,632
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, a 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 VMT between 2019 and
2050 is 1.7% using a linear growth rate. This
growth aligns with that 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.
Origin-Destination Trip Volumes
On the following page, Figure 8 shows the
district map used for the traffic analyses and estimates the origin-destination matrix within
and bordering Frederick County. Districts 15 through 19 are the five external districts.
Tables 9 through 12 on the following pages 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 Central Business District (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.
42
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 23
Figure 8: Frederick County District Map | Source: WRA
43
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 24
1 - 10 Highest Trip Pairs
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 -3,151 668 920 343 1,833 6,131 4,092 615 334 556 359 141 238 729 299 143 1,335 131
2 3,138 -1,735 1,139 291 755 10,159 9,326 589 104 404 237 70 99 196 264 368 2,568 119
3 657 1,732 -1,976 631 360 2,438 3,162 628 105 253 352 103 130 121 212 622 250 96
4 902 1,123 1,976 -4,049 445 4,371 9,937 2,552 103 307 286 130 111 364 1,123 408 615 361
5 333 282 630 4,049 -174 1,540 3,408 1,849 39 108 108 61 43 120 586 102 192 139
6 1,841 769 360 439 174 -3,786 2,190 371 398 587 255 75 186 590 226 93 266 90
7 6,139 10,156 2,395 4,348 1,526 3,815 -16,946 3,350 1,344 3,239 2,772 649 1,155 1,992 2,495 1,445 4,276 987
8 4,141 9,299 3,156 9,934 3,405 2,231 17,007 -5,447 664 1,709 2,382 720 710 982 1,889 1,162 1,838 693
9 615 576 618 2,549 1,848 374 3,361 5,450 -106 422 626 381 140 201 926 160 315 186
10 336 107 105 100 37 398 1,341 658 105 -252 122 12 1,060 76 173 54 94 55
11 562 407 240 301 106 589 3,227 1,703 420 252 -799 112 312 164 260 100 233 141
12 366 241 340 282 106 257 2,761 2,382 625 122 799 -161 415 135 310 119 216 171
13 143 72 103 129 61 75 643 720 381 12 112 161 -12 39 71 36 67 24
14 240 103 129 108 41 187 1,151 706 139 1,060 312 415 12 -45 157 48 77 411
15 729 196 121 364 120 590 1,992 982 201 76 164 135 39 45 -15,330 284 735 221
16 299 264 212 1,123 586 226 2,495 1,889 925 173 260 310 71 157 15,323 -236 622 156
17 143 368 622 408 102 93 1,445 1,162 160 54 100 119 36 48 285 236 -102 27
18 1,335 2,568 250 615 192 266 4,276 1,838 315 94 233 216 67 77 735 622 102 -72
19 131 119 96 361 139 90 987 693 186 55 141 171 24 411 221 156 27 72 -
Table 9: 2022 District-to-District Trip Volumes | Source: WRA
1 - 10 Highest Trip Pairs
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 -33 105 89 164 60 12 20 121 167 134 162 244 201 97 177 241 71 253
2 34 -61 77 179 94 5 9 127 282 146 202 314 294 217 187 153 37 265
3 108 62 -51 111 160 43 31 113 279 193 163 283 255 261 213 116 196 295
4 90 78 51 -21 135 15 7 39 283 175 180 255 271 156 78 143 121 158
5 168 183 112 21 -225 65 25 55 329 272 272 317 327 263 130 287 219 248
6 57 93 160 136 225 -24 48 152 147 129 192 307 222 125 207 299 185 301
7 11 6 44 16 66 23 -2 28 69 29 35 109 75 49 41 67 17 83
8 19 10 32 8 26 47 1 -14 106 63 45 99 101 85 53 73 58 103
9 121 132 120 40 56 151 27 13 -276 137 114 149 247 215 87 235 169 222
10 166 275 279 291 332 147 70 107 279 -194 259 339 81 305 227 321 297 319
11 133 145 199 176 276 127 30 64 138 194 -91 269 171 231 189 291 205 244
12 155 198 165 183 276 191 36 45 115 259 91 -233 139 251 173 265 211 229
13 241 309 283 257 317 307 110 99 149 339 269 233 -339 329 312 333 315 337
14 199 283 257 272 328 221 76 102 248 81 171 139 339 -325 237 323 303 141
15 97 217 261 156 263 125 49 85 215 305 231 251 329 325 -3 182 95 209
16 177 187 213 78 130 207 41 53 88 227 189 173 312 237 4 -203 116 239
17 241 153 116 143 287 299 67 73 235 321 291 265 333 323 181 203 -287 335
18 71 37 196 121 219 185 17 58 169 297 205 211 315 303 95 116 287 -309
19 253 265 295 158 248 301 83 103 222 319 244 229 337 141 209 239 335 309 -
Table 10: 2022 District-to-District Trip Volumes Ranking | Source: WRA
44
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 25
1 - 10 Highest Trip Pairs
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 -35 91 82 159 56 12 28 96 216 128 190 258 233 61 103 255 67 225
2 36 -47 75 198 83 6 9 107 294 150 234 316 300 135 123 192 26 239
3 92 48 -43 119 144 39 31 111 279 197 179 274 265 172 131 121 160 243
4 84 78 44 -13 117 21 7 37 283 183 198 253 273 89 49 188 101 145
5 164 203 120 13 -214 79 51 65 327 271 281 314 325 200 87 305 221 237
6 55 81 143 118 213 -34 60 134 170 130 196 287 232 73 139 303 167 259
7 11 5 40 22 80 33 -1 42 99 45 63 180 112 19 15 93 17 85
8 25 10 32 8 52 59 2 -24 162 76 71 157 151 53 29 105 57 97
9 95 110 114 38 66 133 41 23 -275 171 125 174 249 141 69 261 165 217
10 215 293 280 287 328 169 100 163 278 -223 294 341 108 251 203 329 291 319
11 127 149 206 186 272 129 46 77 174 223 -115 297 207 183 147 309 219 245
12 187 229 182 202 282 195 64 71 126 294 115 -261 192 211 137 307 227 235
13 257 313 275 253 314 286 181 158 174 341 297 261 -339 317 287 337 321 333
14 229 297 266 277 326 229 113 152 250 108 207 191 339 -284 209 331 301 155
15 61 135 172 89 200 73 19 53 141 251 183 211 317 284 -3 248 178 267
16 103 123 131 49 87 139 15 29 69 203 147 137 287 209 3 -241 153 269
17 255 192 121 188 305 303 93 105 261 329 309 307 337 331 245 241 -311 335
18 67 26 160 101 221 167 17 57 165 291 219 227 321 301 177 153 311 -323
19 225 239 243 145 237 259 85 97 217 319 245 235 333 155 267 269 335 323 -
Table 11: 2050 District-to-District Trip Volumes | Source: WRA
1 - 10 Highest Trip Pairs
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 -4,878 1,403 1,781 634 3,217 8,656 5,579 1,286 379 871 496 192 310 2,899 1,203 197 2,624 325
2 4,850 -3,677 2,024 423 1,760 13,830 10,965 1,160 125 678 306 83 120 793 943 450 5,663 264
3 1,376 3,672 -3,766 1,022 739 4,414 5,178 1,102 146 428 571 150 182 578 851 1,007 631 233
4 1,734 1,994 3,763 -7,023 1,033 6,344 12,471 4,427 136 517 423 198 154 1,416 3,660 501 1,231 727
5 613 409 1,020 7,023 -390 1,844 3,454 2,713 48 166 140 84 54 419 1,657 107 339 265
6 3,238 1,787 742 1,030 394 -5,044 2,971 821 592 857 442 131 312 2,070 759 114 603 188
7 8,661 13,831 4,352 6,291 1,816 5,099 -21,843 4,139 1,251 3,728 2,831 562 1,089 6,370 6,830 1,362 6,786 1,671
8 5,667 10,934 5,167 12,456 3,446 3,029 21,842 -5,876 618 2,006 2,215 645 672 3,349 5,472 1,182 3,180 1,266
9 1,301 1,127 1,082 4,423 2,712 831 4,152 5,886 -149 579 918 576 210 754 2,605 185 609 375
10 382 128 145 131 46 593 1,249 615 147 -335 125 13 1,128 204 409 44 130 80
11 879 685 406 506 163 861 3,719 2,000 576 335 -1,046 124 404 517 697 93 371 231
12 503 313 552 417 138 446 2,824 2,215 917 125 1,046 -185 450 396 787 105 322 266
13 194 85 149 198 84 133 555 644 576 13 124 185 -14 82 131 22 71 27
14 313 124 180 148 52 313 1,086 669 209 1,128 404 451 14 -134 401 42 116 649
15 2,899 793 578 1,416 419 2,070 6,370 3,349 754 204 517 396 82 134 -14,674 230 572 176
16 1,203 943 851 3,660 1,657 759 6,830 5,472 2,605 409 697 787 131 401 14,674 -260 659 169
17 197 450 1,007 501 107 114 1,362 1,182 185 44 93 105 22 42 231 260 -92 24
18 2,624 5,663 631 1,231 339 603 6,786 3,180 609 130 371 322 71 116 573 659 92 -63
19 325 264 233 727 265 188 1,671 1,266 375 80 231 266 27 649 176 169 24 63 -
Table 12: 2050 District-to-District Trip Volume Ranking | Source: WRA
45
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 26
Figure 9: WinFred Regional TAZs Within the Study Area | Source: WRA
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Figure 10: Trip Percentages from District 3 | Source: Streetlight Data and WinFred Model
Streetlight
WinFred Model
Refer to Figure 9 for the regional travel demand model zones within the study area.
Comparison with Streetlight Data
The model results of district-to-district trip distributi on were compared with those obtained
from Streetlight data. 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 excepti ons, the percentages correspond well between
the model and Streetlight data for most districts.
46
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 27
Figure 11: Locations Where V/C (LOS D) Ratio 0.85 ≥ in 2050 | Source: WRA
Capacity / LOS Analysis
The maximum flow rate at LOS 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 V/C ratio is then estimated to highlight the segments and intersections
that are critical in terms of traffic operations. Figure 11 shows the locations where the V/C
ratio would exceed 0.85 (LOS D or worse) in 2050.
47
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 28
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 pose 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. Archived crash data from VDOT was utilized for the analysis.
Sites with Potential Safety Issues and High Future Traffic Demand
The capacity analysis previously discussed identified areas with a high future V/C ratio.
This information was then combined with data from VDOT on 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 12 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.
• Route 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.
• Route 7 (Woods Mills to Clarke County Line): There is a top PSI intersection and
segment as well as a predicted V/C between 1.0 and 1.5.
• Greenwood Road south of Valley Mill Road: There is a top PSI intersection, and the
predicted V/C is between 1.0 and 1.5.
• 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.
• US 17/50 (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.
48
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 29
Figure 12: Top 100 PSI Intersections & Segments (2018-2022) & Locations Where the V/C (LOS D) Ratio ≥ 0.85 in 2050 | Source: VDOT
• 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.
• 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, some of these six locations were discussed 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, Route 7 and Senseny Road each had a cluster of crash pairs located within
49
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 30
1,200 feet, although there was no apparent pattern or significant clustering. Pedestrian-
involved crashes showed more clustering. Six of the eight crashes occurred within a half-
mile radius from the intersection of US 522 (Front Royal Pike), US 17/50, 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 17/50 and US 522 shown in Figure 13 is
noteworthy in that the north side of US 17/50 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 from 2018 to 2022. 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.
Figure 13: Clustering of Pedestrian-Related Crashes Near I-81 Ramps at MM 313A, US 522, US 17/50 | Source: VDOT
50
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 31
Freight Accident Analysis
The purpose of this analysis was to identify 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 in the future if public concerns
continue to be voiced.
51
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 32
Project Needs
Given the nature of the study area, a specific point was made to identify problems
throughout as opposed to focusing solely 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 Planning 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.
Bicycle/Pedestrian
As indicated in the 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Update5, the existing bicycle network
lacks infrastructure and 62% of roadways have 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 (people who prefer to use
walking as their primary mode of transportation). 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 average daily traffic (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. In addition, two segments
of Route 7 within the study area fall within the 1.5 > V/C > 1.
5 NSVRC, WinFred MPO, Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update
52
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 33
• 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. The extension of Crossover Boulevard to US 17/50 has been identified in
the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan as an important connection and will offer
improved access to the Virginia Inland Port.
• Large-scale residential land development on the study area’s southern end uses Warrior
Drive and Tasker Road to access I-81 and Route 37. Additional interstate or state route
connectivity from Warrior Drive is critical to continue residential development in
this area and relieve congestion on Tasker Road. The Comprehensive plan includes
a proposed link to extend Warrior Drive to the proposed Route 37 alignment as a
potential solution to redistribute traffic in this area.
Safety
Upon reviewing the VDOT crash data from 2017-2021 and the Top PSI intersections it also
becomes apparent that there is a significant safety issue on Route 7.
• 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 PSI priority by VDOT statewide. A SMART SCALE project is in the design
phase to add capacity and reduce conflict points to a 0.52-mile segment of roadway
in this crash cluster area, but 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 (FI) crashes.
• ADT on Route 7 Eastbound6: 14,000 VPD; Route 7 Westbound: 14,000 VPD; Total
Crashes = 735; FI = 176
6 ArcGIS, VDOT, https://vdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=a8da35dd9ce54993b25f64487c3717ec
53
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 34
• ADT on Route 11 Northbound7: 14,000 VPD; Route 11 Southbound: 14,000 VPD;
Total Crashes = 347; FI = 71
• The study area includes 24 intersections and 15 segments in the Statewide VDOT 2017-
2021 Top 100 PSI list.
• Six of the 15 segments are located on Route 7:
• Begin milepost (MP) 1.75, end MP 2.00: Total Crashes = 23; FI = 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 Six Year
Improvement Program (SYIP), with construction completed in 2026.
I-81 Needs – Identified in the I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan:
• While not specifically identified in the I-81 CIP and outside of the study area,
improvements are warranted at the intersection of I-81 Exit 307 to address safety and
congestion. A project Pipeline study has been completed at this interchange to identify
cost effective solutions to address safety and congestion concerns.
• 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.
CMSs 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.
7 ArcGIS, VDOT, https://vdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=a8da35dd9ce54993b25f64487c3717ec
54
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 35
• 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.
• A design concept was created for a diverging diamond interchange at Exit 317 to
address congestion and safety (this is a funded project).
The purpose and needs statements were included in a survey for public input and presented
at a public meeting, and the results are discussed in the following section.
55
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 36
Agency & Public Engagement
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
• Assimilate public views, preferences, and support for project outcomes that
enhance mobility, safety, and efficiency
The McCormick Taylor project team collaborated with VDOT, Frederick County, the City
of Winchester, the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (NSVRC) and the
WinFred 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
(revised November 2021). The draft Public Engagement Plan (PEP) was shared with the
public for review and comment and presented to Frederick County for implementation
approval.
PEP Overview
The PEP for the EFCTS project outlines the comprehensive, proactive outreach strategy
implemented during the project. As part of the project development process, Frederick
County aimed to have clear, accurate, and regular communications with the public,
including project stakeholders, public officials, and the media, as appropriate. Their
goal was to effectively plan and implement engagement opportunities to dialogue with
stakeholders and collect project-related public input and feedback.
56
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 37
Figure 14: Disadvantaged Communities | Source: Climate and EJScreen
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. 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 identified low-income communities can be found in the
Appendix. 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 disadvantaged communities can help improve
transportation project outcomes that will benefit the broader community while also
minimizing potential harm from a project.
57
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 38
Figure 15: Populations of Color | Source: US EPA EJScreen
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 (CCA) which is discussed in more detail as part of this section on Page (41).
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 on the following page. The McCormick Taylor project team received
an advance Notice to Proceed (NTP) so the key team members could take part in the
Transportation Forum conducted on Thursday, November 10, 2022, which is not shown on
58
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 39
QUARTER 2 QUARTER 3
20242023
JUN.APR.MAY
QUARTER 4 QUARTER 1 QUARTER 2
SEPT.JUL.AUG.DEC.OCT.NOV.MAR.JAN.FEB.JUN.APR.MAY
PROJECT WEBSITE
STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS
PUBLIC MEETINGS (2)
PROJECT COMMUNICATIONS
Figure 16: Public Involvement Acti viti es Schedule | Source: US EPA EJScreen
the schedule. The schedule refl ects the offi cial 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 meeti ng for the EFCTS project was held on
November 10, 2022, and provided for a brief introducti on to the planned project, in
additi on to an opportunity for the public to express their thoughts, provide feedback,
and ask questi ons about the previous Route 37 Bypass project. A paper survey was made
available to meeti ng att endees to provide an opportunity for them to provide responses
to questi ons on the work already completed, and senti ments on next steps. Eleven
completed survey forms were collected before att endees left the meeti ng.ng. z A review
of the 11 completed surveys indicated the Route 37 Bypass was sti ll on the minds of the
respondents at the meeti ng. Of the 11 respondents, seven stated that they were familiar
with the previous Route 37 studies (two were new to the area, and two lived outside of
the project area), and 10 respondents said they support County funding for the Route 37
East Project. Copies of the completed surveys are provided in the Appendix.
A second public meeti ng was held on November 16, 2023, again as part of the regularly
scheduled Fredrick County Transportati on Forum. Assistant Director John Bishop, AICP
moderated the meeti ng, and Alex Castrechini, P.E., the McCormick Taylor Project Manager,
provided an update on the project status and next steps. Meeti ng att endees were also
advised of the availability of the draft PEP for public review and comment, which provided
a preview of the planned public outreach strategies for the project. Ms. Castrechini’s
PowerPoint presentati on also included a web map developed to visually convey projected
traffi c 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 CCA and invited
the public to review a copy of the report which was available at the project display stati on
59
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 40
81
Draft Bicycle/Pedestrian Needs
Draft Purpose Statement
148 Purpose and Needs Statement Surveys Received
28 Additional Comments
139 (95%) agree with statements as presented
8 (5%) disagree with statements as presented
1 did not provide a response
Draft Congestion Needs Draft Interstate 81 Needs
79%
78 agree with statements as presented
21%
21 disagree with statements as presented
49 did not provide a response
91%
92 agree with statements as presented
9%
9 disagree with statements as presented
47 did not provide a response
88%
95 agree with statements as presented
12%
13 disagree with statements as presented
40 did not provide a response
86%
104 agree with statements as presented
14%
17 disagree with statements as presented
0 did not provide a response
Draft Safety Needs
Figure 17: Purpose & Needs Survey Results
in the rear of the meeting room. A copy of the PEP, and the CCA 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 to review each of the
statements individually, and then provide feedback. Since the survey was extensive and
no responses were received the evening of the meeting, an online version was created
and released for public use in early December 2023, remaining available until mid-January
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
60
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 41
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, 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.
Community Context Audit
McCormick Taylor worked with the County to identify fifteen key stakeholders to be
invited to take part in the CCA. The purpose of the CCA 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) a Microsoft 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 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 a Microsoft Teams video interview. All interviews
were recorded for accuracy and with advance permission from each interviewee. No one
requested an in-person interview
61
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 42
Stakeholders who completed
the interview process:
Stakeholders who
were contacted,
but opted out of 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
• 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
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.
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.
62
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 43
Board of Supervisors Core Value
“A government unit based on honesty, trust, integrity, and respect that
understands the importance of clear communication and a willingness to listen.”
• 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
including walking, biking, and 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 CCA Interview Summary which
includes additional detail is provided in the Appendix.
63
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 44
Logical Termini, Independent Utility, & Concept
Development
Logical Termini & Independent Utility
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.
Projects must have independent utility meaning they must be usable and be a reasonable
expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements are made. The original
Route 37 bypass was considered, in addition to other projects that will be covered on the
following pages.
64
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 45
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 full 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. Refer to
Figure 18 on page 47 for a map showing each of the following segments.
Bypass Segment 1 from Route 37 on the west side of I-81 to Route 11 includes a system
interchange with Route 37 on the west and a cloverleaf interchange with I-81. The cloverleaf
interchange as proposed would be difficult if not impossible to meet interchange spacing
requirements and would require significant additional improvements on Interstate 81 and
sideroads to meet current design criteria. This segment had the least traffic volume in the
updated travel demand model at approximately 13,000 VPD and it is the most expensive
segment of the original 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 I-81
and Route 37.
Bypass Segment 2 from Route 11 to Route 7 (Berryville Pike) attracts about 18,000 VPD
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 likely be over $250 million dollars given the interchanges, right of way
(ROW), and structures required.
Bypass Segment 3 from Route 7, Berryville Pike to US 17/50 (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 approximately 22,000 VPD in
2050 but has less independent value as it relates to the needs identified in this study. This
segment would also likely cost over $200 million in the prior configuration. The segment
from Berryville Pike to Senseny Road has more value and could reduce traffic on Senseny
Road and Greenwood Road and provide an alternative to Route 7 Berryville Pike. The
segment south of Senseny Road to Millwood Pike traverses significant topography and
an alternatives analysis would be recommended to find the best and most economically
feasible route.
65
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 46
Bypass Segment 4 from US 17/50 (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 Boulevard for future relief. This segment would
also likely cost over $200 million dollars in the prior configuration and would attract
approximately 26,000 VPD in the 2050 forecast.
Bypass Segment 5 from US 522 (Front Royal Pike) to I-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. The segment of the bypass between Tasker Road and the Warrior Drive
extension is forecasted to have about 50,000 VPD and would require a four-lane typical
section; the capacity of a two-lane roadway with minimal access points is approximately
23,000 to 29,000 VPD. From the Warrior Drive extension to US 17/50, a two-lane roadway
would be sufficient for the 2050 forecasted demand of approximately 27,000 VPD.
Using a maximum of 29,000 VPD capacity for a two-lane roadway as a guide, each segment
of the Route 37 bypass would be sufficiently served in 2050 with a two-lane roadway,
except for the segment between Tasker Road and the Warrior Drive extension which
would warrant a four-lane highway based on projected volumes.
66
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 47
BYPASSSEGMENT-1
BYPASSSEGMENT-2
BYPASSSEGMENT-3
BYPASSSEGMENT-4
BYPASSSEGMENT-5
Berryville Pike
Berryvill
e
A
v
e Welltown RdWyc
k
S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSensen
y
R
d
Senseny
R
d Haggerty BlvdE C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdWarrior DrTasker RdTasker
R
d
Old CharlesTownRd
FairmountAveFortCollierRdS
n
o
wd
e
n
Bridge R d
Park
Jim Barnett
Park
Izaac Walton
Club
CountryWinchester
Course
Golf
Valley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester
17
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81
11
11
11
7 7
7
37
81
S U N N Y S I D E
E S TAT E S
FA IRWAY
H E I G HT S
B UF F LIC K
S O U T H V I E WWESTWOOD
M I L L S
PA R K I N S
H E I G H T S
S E N S E N Y
H E I G H TS
M I L L E R
PA R K
C O L L E G E
HILLS
SH E NAND OAH
S P R I N G S
J O R D A N
FA C TO RY
B U R N T
S P R I N G
VA L L E Y
HE I G H TS
G RE E N WO O D
KNO L L S
B U R N IN G
0 10.50.25
MilesN
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY
www.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation
Original Route 37 Bypass | Segments
Figure 18: Original Bypass Segments
67
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 48
Concept Development and Potential Solutions
Formulation of different concepts and solutions were centered around the needs identified
and presented to the public. The Partial Limited Access Concept is defined by the following
characteristics as defined in VDOTs Roadway Design Manual: provides access to select
public roads, crossings at grade, and some private driveway connections. Project cost
summaries for the following Potential Improvement Projects are shown on Figure 19 on
page 51 and summarized in Table 13 on page 52.
Taking the conglomerate dataset of the public feedback, the 2050 forecasted volumes
and V/C ratios, and analysis of the sections of the Route 37 bypass from the 2001 EIS,
the following concepts were formulated and proposed to the public in March 2024
for feedback. This study focused on providing cost-effective alternatives and volume
appropriate solutions to address the 2050 forecasted volumes. This includes a look at the
sections of the Route 37 Bypass to determine if a two-lane partial limited access roadway
in lieu of a four-lane highway full limited access could adequately meet future needs.
Included in the following discussion are findings from the analysis of Potential Projects 1,
3 and 4 and design considerations that were considered or warrant further analysis. The
alignments from the Route 37 bypass in the 2001 EIS and UPC 85972 Study Update were
used as a basis for these discussions. Since 2001, there has been land development which
occurred either in or in proximity to these alignments. The following paragraphs discuss
some of the challenges which warrant further analysis during a potential preliminary
engineering phase.
Potential Improvement Project 1: Route 37 extension from Route 11 to Route 7 as a two-
lane partial limited access roadway (anticipated Major Collector).
Preliminary Assessment
There is a large commercial property at the northern end of this alignment that would
be bisected by the alignment and may warrant additional analysis in the future if this
segment were to be widened and residential development that interferes with the
planned alignment. 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 likely be required due to floodplain
impacts. Approximately ~2700 ft of bridge is required to construct this on alignment. See
68
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 49
Table 14 for a preliminary cost estimate based on the existing alignment and additional
design criteria.
Potential Improvement Project 2: Widening Airport Road from its current configuration
of two lanes to four lanes between US 522 and Admiral Byrd Drive (anticipated Major
Collector) to help alleviate congestion (1 > V/C > 0.85) entering the Airport from I-81.
Potential Improvement Project 3: Tasker Road/Route 37 to US 522 (anticipated Major
Collector/Minor Arterial) as a full limited access highway from Tasker Road/Route 37 to
Warrior Drive and partial limited access roadway from Warrior Drive to US 522.
Preliminary Assessment
An at-grade connection of the existing alignment with US 522 is located ~350 ft from two
driveway connections on U2 522. It may 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 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 to reduce these stream impacts and decrease structure lengths.
See Table 16 for a preliminary cost estimate based on the existing alignment and additional
design criteria. This project is projected to require four-lanes between I-81 and Warrior
Drive as the projected volumes in 2050 exceed the range shown in the typical section
below. The typical section graphic was developed and presented at the March 14, 2024.
69
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 50
Potential Improvement Project 4: This project entails the extension of Haggerty Boulevard/
Hallowed Crossings Way (anticipated Major Collector).
Preliminary Assessment
The recent development “The Retreat at Winding Creek” is in the vicinity of this alignment
but is not thought to be a conflict or area of concern with respect to this alignment. See
Table 17 for a preliminary cost estimate based on the existing alignment and additional
design criteria.
Potential Improvement Project 5: This proposed improvement includes the addition of a
center turn lane to Senseny Road between I-81 and Greenwood Road.
70
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 51
1
2
5
4
3
MAJOR
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
MAJOR COL
L
E
C
T
O
R
/
MINOR ART
E
R
I
A
L MAJOR COLLECTORMAJORCOLLECTOR
MAJ
O
R
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
Berryville Pike
Berryvil
l
e
A
v
e Welltown RdWy
c
k
S
t Woods Mill RdValley Mill
R
d
Greenwood RdSensen
y
R
d
Senseny
R
d Haggerty BlvdE C
o
r
k
S
t
Greenwood RdHillandale RdWhite Oak RdWarrior DrTasker RdTasker
R
d
Old CharlesTownRd
FairmountAveFortCollierRdS
n
o
wd
e
n
Bridge R d
Park
Jim Barnett
ParkIzaacWalton
Club
Country
Winchester
Course
Golf
Valley
Carper's
Regional Airport
Winchester
S U N N Y S I D E
E S TAT E S
FA I R WAY
H EIG HTS
B UFFL IC K
S O U T H V I E WWESTWOOD
MIL LS
PA R K I N S
H E I G H T S
S E N S E N Y
HE I GH T S
M I L L E R
PA R K
C O L L E G E
HILLS
SHENANDOAH
S P R I N G S
J O R D A N
FA C T O RY
B U R N T
S P R I N G
VA L L E Y
H E I GH T S
GR E EN WOO D
K N O L L S
B U R N I N G
0 10.50.25
MilesN
TRANSPORTATION STUDYEASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY
www.FCVA.us/Departments/Planning-Development/Transportation
Concept Development | Proposed Solutions
17
17
17
522
522
522
522
81
81
81
11
11
11
7 7
7
37
81
Figure 19: Potenti al Improvement Projects
71
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 52
Details are 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 in the Appendix.
To gain perspective and perform analyses, the webmap developed for this project included
layers from multiple sources such as Frederick County planning, VDOT planning, and the
traffic forecast by WRA. The needs statements are centered around VDOT’s PSI Segments
and Intersections, review of the projected 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 examine a connection 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 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
Table 13: Construction Cost Estimate – Side-By-Side Costs
May 2024 Inflation Increase of 5% Compounded Each Year
Project
#
Project Total With
Contingencies (millions)
2025
(millions)
2026
(millions)
2027
(millions)
2028
(millions)
2029
(millions)
1 $179.5 $188.5 $198 $208 $218 $229
3 $13.5 $14 $15 $16 $17 $17.5
2 $196 $206 $216 $227 $238.5 $250
4 $49 $51.5 $54 $56.5 $59.5 $62.5
5 $25.5 $27 $28 $29.5 $31 $33
TOTAL $463.5 $487 $511 $537 $564 $592
72
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 53
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.
To further evaluate these alternatives, we conducted an analysis of the potential VHT
(vehicle hour time) impacts by looking at the following scenarios:
• The No build scenario (not changing the existing roadway network)
• Construction of Potential Project 1 (referred to as Northern Section)
• Construction of Potential Project 3 (referred to as Southern Section)
• Full bypass build (construction of the bypass as a full limited access facility as planned
previously)
The results of this analysis can be found in the Appendix. This comparison was completed
for AM peak, Mid-day peak, PM peak, nighttime, and daily average time of day to assess
the differences between these time periods. Also, the impacts to different facility types
were conducted during the various times of day and for each scenario. The tables include
volumes and percent changes between the volumes.
Time of day did have a significant impact on the volumes themselves but not in the percent
change relative to each scenario. Most apparent is the 68% increase in FACTYPE 2 (Minor
Freeway) for the full bypass build scenario. This increase is coupled with a decrease in
the minor arterial and collector facility types which would provide network benefit for
these facility types which were identified as potential problems based on v/c ratios. A full
bypass type connection provides the most benefit but the northern and southern possible
connection provides relief as well. In contrast, impacts to VHT from the independent
construction of Potential Project 1 and 3 are less than 10%. In terms of the VHT analysis,
although marginally better, the southern connection offers slightly more benefit than the
northern connection.
73
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 54
These planning level estimates included the following assumptions:
• Drainage/Stormwater Management (SWM)/Erosion and Sedimentation
Control (ESC) is 25% of the subtotal of major roadway quantities
• Utilities is 3% of the subtotal of major roadway quantities
• Signal Performance Measures (SPM)/Maintenance of Traffic (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
• ROW is 5% of the construction subtotal
• Construction Engineering & Inspection (CEI) is 17.5% of the construction
subtotal
Planning Level Cost Estimates
The cost estimate summary can be found in Table 13 on page 52. Breakdowns by project
can be found in Tables 14 to 18.
74
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 55
Table 14: Constructi on Cost Esti mate – Potenti al Improvement Project 1
Item Quanti ty / Percentage Unit Cost Cost (Millions)
Full-Depth Pavement (sf)383178 $12 $4.5
Milling (sf)0 $24 -
Leveling (sf)0 $3 -
Shoulder Pavement (sf)224400 $8 $2
Regular Excavati on (cy)1126486 $20 $22.5
Bridge / Structure(s) (sf)99316 $400 $40
Subtotal $69
Drainage / SWM / ESC 25%-$17
Uti lity 3%-$2
SPM / MOT 5%-$3.5
Traffi c Signals 4 $500,000 $2
Subtotal $93.5
Mobilizati on --$4.5
Constructi on Survey (1% + 5,000)--$1
Subtotal $99
Conti ngency 30%-$29.5
Constructi on Subtotal $129
PE 10%-$13
FD 7%-$9
ROW 5%-$6
CEI 17.50%-$22.5
Project Total (With Conti ngencies)$179.5
ADT -
Terrain Rolling
Design Speed 60 MPH
Minimum Radius 1200’
SSD 570’
Lane Width 12’
Shoudler Width 6’
Max Grade 10%
Berryvill
e
P
i
k
e
Valley Mill Rd
Brentwood
Terrace
Shenandoah
Hills
Route
11
81
81
P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
Major Collector
75
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 56
Mil
l
w
o
o
d
P
i
k
e
Bufflick Heights
81
81 Winchester
Regional
Airport
Southview
Bu
f
f
l
i
c
k
R
d
VictoryRdFront Royal PikeAi
r
p
o
r
t
R
d
Airport
R
d
Table 15: Constructi on Cost Esti mate – Potenti al Improvement Project 2
ADT >2,000
(2050)
Terrain Rolling
Design Speed 25 MPH
Minimum Radius 115’
SSD 155’
Lane Width 12’
Shoudler Width 6’
Max Grade 10%
Major Collector
Item Quanti ty / Percentage Unit Cost Cost (Millions)
Full-Depth Pavement (sf)26767 $12.00 $0.5
Milling (sf)135067 $24.00 $3
Leveling (sf)135067 $3.00 $0.5
Shoulder Pavement (sf)36545 $8.00 $0.5
Regular Excavati on (cy)28663 $20.00 $0.5
Bridge / Structure(s) (sf)0 $400.00 -
Subtotal $5
Drainage / SWM / ESC 25%-$0.5
Uti lity 3%-$0.5
SPM / MOT 8%-$0.5
Traffi c Signals 1 $500,000 $0.5
Subtotal $7
Mobilizati on --$0.5
Constructi on Survey (1% + 5,000)--$0.5
Subtotal $8
Conti ngency 30%-$2
Constructi on Subtotal $10
PE 10%-$1
FD 7%-$0.5
ROW 5%-$0.5
CEI 17.50%-$1.5
Project Total (With Conti ngencies)$13.5
76
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 57
Table 16: Constructi on Cost Esti mate – Potenti al Improvement Project 3
Item Quanti ty / Percentage Unit Cost Cost (Millions)
Full-Depth Pavement (sf)590090 $12.00 $7
Milling (sf)0 $24.00 -
Leveling (sf)0 $3.00 -
Shoulder Pavement (sf)201572 $8.00 $1.5
Regular Excavati on (cy)985450 $20.00 $20
Bridge / Structure(s) (sf)112835 $400.00 $45
Subtotal $73.5
Drainage / SWM / ESC 25%-$18.5
Uti lity 3%-$2
SPM / MOT 8%-$6
Traffi c Signals 4 $500,000 $2
Subtotal $102
Mobilizati on --$5
Constructi on Survey (1% + 5,000)--$1
Subtotal $108
Conti ngency 30%-$32.5
Constructi on Subtotal $140.5
PE 10%-$14
FD 7%-$10
ROW 5%-$7
CEI 17.50%-$24.5
Project Total (With Conti ngencies)$196
ADT -
Terrain Rolling
Design Speed 60 MPH
Minimum Radius 1200’
SSD 570’
Lane Width 12’
Shoudler Width 6’
Max Grade 6%
Major Collector
Front Royal Pike81
81
SouthveiwWestwood
Bufflick HeightsPlainfield Heights
Taske
r
Rd Warrior DrPeperm
i
l
l
Rd
37
Route37Extension
Warr
i
orDrEx
t
e
n
si
o
n
77
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 58
Table 17: Constructi on Cost Esti mate – Potenti al Improvement Project 4
Item Quanti ty / Percentage Unit Cost Cost (Millions)
Full-Depth Pavement (sf)92910 $12.00 $1
Milling (sf)0 $24.00 -
Leveling (sf)0 $3.00 -
Shoulder Pavement (sf)54198 $8.00 $0.5
Regular Excavati on (cy)298887 $20.00 $6
Bridge / Structure(s) (sf)25200 $400.00 $10
Subtotal $17.5
Drainage / SWM / ESC 25%-$4.5
Uti lity 3%-$0.5
SPM / MOT 5%-$1
Traffi c Signals 4 $500,000 $2
Subtotal $25.5
Mobilizati on --$1
Constructi on Survey (1% + 5,000)--$0.5
Subtotal $27
Conti ngency 30%-$8
Constructi on Subtotal $35
PE 10%-$3.5
FD 7%-$2.5
ROW 5%-$2
CEI 17.50%-$6
Project Total (With Conti ngencies)$49
ADT >2,000
(2050)
Terrain -
Design Speed 60 MPH
Minimum Radius 1200’
SSD 570’
Lane Width 12’
Shoudler Width 6’
Max Grade 6%
Major Collector
Berryville Pik
e
Sulpher Spring Rd
Miller Heights
Fairway
Estates
81
81
Greenwood
Heights
Senseny
Heights
Berryvil
l
e
A
v
e
Senseny
R
d GreenwoodRdChanning DrHaggerty Blvd/Hallowed Crossing Way78
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 59
Table 18: Constructi on Cost Esti mate – Potenti al Improvement Project 5
Item Quanti ty / Percentage Unit Cost Cost (Millions)
Full-Depth Pavement (sf)186520 $12.00 $2
Milling (sf)99680 $24.00 $2.5
Leveling (sf)99680 $3.00 $0.5
Shoulder Pavement (sf)111300 $8.00 $1
Regular Excavati on (cy)62812 $20.00 $1
Bridge / Structure(s) (sf)3072 $400.00 $1
Subtotal $8
Drainage / SWM / ESC 25%-$2
Uti lity 3%-$0.5
SPM / MOT 8%-$0.5
Traffi c Signals 4 $500,000 $2
Subtotal $13
Mobilizati on --$0.5
Constructi on Survey (1% + 5,000)--$0.5
Subtotal $14
Conti ngency 30%-$4
Constructi on Subtotal $18
PE 10%-$2
FD 7%-$1.5
ROW 5%-$1
CEI 17.50%-$3
Project Total (With Conti ngencies)$25.5
ADT >2,000
(2050)
Terrain -
Design Speed 35 MPH
Minimum Radius 316’
SSD 250’
Lane Width 12’
Shoudler Width 6’
Max Grade 9%
Major Collector
Berryvill
e
P
i
k
e
Sulpher Spring Rd
Miller Heights
Fairway
Estates
81
81
Greenwood
Heights
Senseny
Heights
Berryvill
e
A
v
e
Senseny
R
d GreenwoodRdChanningDr
Haggerty Blvd/Hallowed Crossing Way79
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 60
Table 19: Mini TIP
Potential Improvement Project 1
Project Total With Contingencies
$179.5 Million
Project Needs
Safety
- This project would improve safety by
diverting traffic off Route 7 (2050 ADT
without project: ~47,000, 2050 with project
~28,000)
Access
- This was proposed to be a four-lane limited
access highway (similar to the existing Route
37 bypass)
Mobility - Projected volume in 2050 is ~18,000
Issues that May Affect Design or
Construction
This project poses many difficulties
from constructability standpoint.
These are documented in the logical
Termini, Independent Utility, and
Concept Development section of the
report.
Potential Improvement Project 3
Project Total With Contingencies
$196 Million
Project Needs
Safety
- In the absense of this link, existing traffic
uses Tasker Road in order to gain access to
the xx residential parcels in the vicinity of
Warrior Drive
Access
- This was proposed to be a four-lane limited
access highway similar to the existing Route
37 bypass. Volumes could justify a four lane
roadway from Tasker Road to Warrior Drive in
2050
Mobility
- Projected volume in 2050 is ~50,000
between I-81 and future Warrior Drive and
~27,000 between future Warrior Drive and US
522
Issues that May Affect Design or
Construction
There are a number of environmental
impacts in this area, these are
documented in the Logical Termini,
Independent Utility, and Concept
Development section of the report.
Potential Improvement Project 2
Project Total With Contingencies
$13.5 Million
Project Needs
Safety - There are two severe injury crashes and two
minor crashes between 2017 and 2021
Access
- The projected V/C ratio in 2050 is between
0.85 and 1. Construction of this project will
help with access to the airport as it grows
Mobility - Projected volume in 2050 is ~17,000
Issues that May Affect Design or
Construction
Maintaining phased construction (this
section cannot be closed).
80
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 61
Table 19 (Continued): Mini TIP
Potential Improvement Project 5
Project Total With Contingencies
$25.5 Million
Project Needs
Safety
- 15 crashes reported from 2017 - 2022
- There are 2 intersection projects in VDOT’s
Top 100 PSI 18-22 Listing
- V/C > 1 in 2050
Access - There are no bicycle or pedestrian
accomodations
Mobility
- There are 27 driveways/intersecting
roadways along this corridor where a
center turn lane would prevent queuing
Issues that May Affect Design or
Construction
This project would need to be
completed using phased construction
and significant delays could occur.
Lack of shoulders will make phasing
difficult. May not be a competitive
project for grants.
Potential Improvement Project 4
Project Total With Contingencies
$49 Million
Project Needs
Safety
- There is 1 intersection on the Top 100
PSI list on Greenwood Road in this area
and one segment south of Senseny Road.
Construction of this segment would take
some demand off Greenwood Road
Access
- The top half of Haggerty Boulevard is being
constructed by a developer. It makes sense
to close the connection to Senseny Boulevard
to improve access in this area
Mobility
- This creates an alternate roadway to
Greenwood Road to get north/south through
the project area
Issues that May Affect Design or
Construction
A development in this area, The Re-
treat at Winding Creek, was construct-
ed since the originaly bypass was pro-
posed. It will be challenging to either
tie into the existing road network here
or do some kind of flyover bridge.
81
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 62
Grant Opportunities & Next Steps
Grant Opportunities
There are multiple grant opportunities available to fund any project or combination of
these projects. At the time of this report, the 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 United States Department of Transportation (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
October 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.
82
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 63
Next Steps
In addition to searching for grant opportunities to fund the potential solutions proposed,
this study can be used in many ways. Reviewing the information provided in this study to
re-calibrate the thought process behind the necessity of constructing the Route 37 Eastern
bypass is an important one. Consideration should be made to update the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan/Eastern Frederick County Road Plan to show that a two-lane roadway
can meet the future transportation needs in certain segments of the bypass. Additionally,
consider adding the other proposed improvements in this study to support long term
transportation planning goals to increase mobility and safety for the residents of Frederick
County and the traveling public. Examples include capacity preservation on US 522 and
US 17/50 as this intersection and segments/intersections along US 522 were identified
on VDOT’s Top PSI list. As development increases in Frederick County, these areas of
preservation should receive special attention and consideration.
It is also a recommendation to find a mechanism to ensure that future development
will not interfere with projects included in the Transportation Plan. As noted previously,
sections of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass will not be constructable on the alignment scoped
in the 2001 EIS due to development that has occurred since. Consider asking developers
to provide a GIS layer with the proposed footprint to avoid these conflicts in the future.
This study is intended to precipitate a Phase II analysis to fully vet the alternatives so that
the County and Commonwealth make the best-informed decisions possible with tax funds.
As noted in the section above, SMART SCALE applications in the 6th round now require the
following for roadways on new alignments: “Provide a Planning Study/Safety Study, which
includes an operational analysis and documents a preferred alternative that is consistent
with the scope described in the application to support this feature. The study must include
an alternatives analysis that considers improvements not on a new alignment” (https://
smartscale.virginia.gov/media/smartscale/documents/508_R6_Technical-Guide_FINAL_
FINAL_acc043024_PM.pdf, Table 2.6). It was not within this study’s scope to do this
detailed analysis for the proposed roadways on new alignment; therefore, a Phase II is
necessary to enable the County to apply for SMART SCALE funding in the future.
83
EASTERN FREDERICK COUNTY TRANSPORTATION STUDY (EFCTS)PAGE | 64
A. Public Engagement Plan
B. Community Context Audit Summary
C. Community Context Audit Interview Script
D. Purpose and Needs Statement Survey
E. Purpose and Needs Survey Results Summary
F. Transportation Forum Meeting Agenda
G. Transportation Forum Project Overview
H. Transportation Forum Public Comment Form
I. Traffic Forecasting Analysis by WRA
Appendix
84
85
2
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 3
1.1 Project Description 3
1.2 Plan Purpose 3
2. Regulatory Compliance 3
3. Disadvantaged Communities
and Environmental Justice 5
4. PEP Approach 7
4.1 Project Communications 8
4.2 Project Website/Web Page 9
4.3 Stakeholder Identification 10
4.4 Public Engagement 10
5. American with Disabilities Act of 1990 10
6. Quality Control/Quality Assurance 11
7. Public Engagement Activities Schedule 11
86
3
Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study
Draft Public Engagement Plan (PEP)
Last Updated 10-27-23
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
Frederick County is studying transportation issues and viable solutions for the project area situated to
the east of the City of Winchester. The goal of the study is to develop a well-defined and documented
set of transportation needs and implementable transportation improvements.
The study area includes Interstate 81 (I-81) in the west to the Frederick County/Clarke County line in the
east; and extends from Route 761 on the north side of the city to the Tasker Road area east of the I-81
Exit 310.
The study will analyze transportation issues related to the road network and conceptually develop viable
transportation solutions for the area through data collection and interviews. A map of the project area is
provided in Figure 1.
1.2 Plan Purpose
As part of the project development process, Frederick County will communicate regularly with the
public, project stakeholders, and public officials and the media, as appropriate, and provide
opportunities for project-related input and feedback. The Public Engagement Plan (PEP) outlines a
comprehensive, proactive outreach strategy to be implemented during the study. The overall goal of the
PEP is 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
2. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Public participation in the transportation planning process has been a priority for federal, state, and
local officials since the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in 1991
and its successors, the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21); the Safe Accountable
Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU); the Moving Ahead for
Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP 21); the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act in
2015; and continues to be maintained in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) which was
signed by President Biden on November 15, 2021. The IIJA also requires agencies to prioritize
investments in low-income, historically underserved, economically disadvantaged areas, including rural
communities and tribal lands.
87
4
Figure 1: Project Area Map
88
5
The Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study PEP is comprised of strategies and activities designed
to meet or exceed the guidance and directives prescribed in the IIJA, and the following:
• The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA of 1969);
• Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended in 2016;
• Executive Order 12898 of February 11, 1994;
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
• Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990;
• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990; and
• Executive Order 14091 of February 16, 2023.
Additionally, the overall framework and context of this PEP are consistent with the Virginia Department
of Transportation (VDOT) Public Involvement Manual, dated November 2021. The PEP follows the
guidance in the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) document, Promising Practices for
Meaningful Public Involvement in Transportation Decision-Making, dated October 2022, to reduce
inequities and ensure communities have a voice in the transportation decision-making process.
3. DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Beyond requirements to identify disadvantaged communities, it is important to analyze for these
populations at the earliest possible time in project development because, historically, these groups have
been left out of the planning and project development process. Early identification of disadvantaged
communities can improve transportation for the entire community, as well as minimize or avoid
potential harm from a project. Additionally, appropriate communication tools and outreach activities for
these groups can be determined in advance.
In January of 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14008, which directed the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) to develop the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool. The tool has
an interactive map and uses datasets that are indicators of burdens in eight categories: climate change,
energy, health, housing, legacy pollution, transportation, water and wastewater, and workforce
development. The tool uses this information to identify communities that are experiencing these
burdens. These are the communities that are disadvantaged because they are overburdened and
underserved.
Within the study area, there are no United States (US) Census tracts that are considered disadvantaged.
However, within Winchester City, adjacent to the Interstate 81 border, Census tract 51840000100 is
considered to be disadvantaged (Figure 2).
89
6
Figure 2: Disadvantaged Communities
Source: Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool
VDOT requires that all projects be evaluated using EJSCREEN. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) developed an Environmental Justice (EJ) mapping and screening tool, called Environmental Justice
Screening and Mapping Tool (EJSCREEN). It is based on nationally consistent data and is an approach
that combines environmental and demographic indicators in maps and a standard report. EJSCREEN
uses demographic factors as very general indicators of a community’s potential susceptibility to
environmental pollutants. The latest version (2019) of EJSCREEN uses the 2013-2017 ACS 5-year
estimates summary file data.
EJ is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national
origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental
laws, regulations, and policies.
EJSCREEN defines low-income as individuals whose ratio of household income to poverty level in the
past 12 months was less than 2 (as a fraction of individuals for whom ratio was determined).
At the block group level, Figure 3 compares the low-income population of the study area to the rest of
the state. Within the study area, there is one block group that is in the 89th percentile. This means that
89% of the block group’s population is low-income.
90
7
Figure 3: Low-income Populations
Source: EJSCREEN
EJSCREEN defines people of color people as who list their racial status as a race other than white alone
and/or list their ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino. That is, all people other than non-Hispanic white-alone
individuals. The word "alone" in this case indicates that the person is of a single race, not multiracial.
Figure 4 on the following page compares the population of people of color at the block group level to
the rest of the state. Within the study area, there is one block group that is in the 69th percentile and
one block group that is in the 51st percentile.
4. PEP APPROACH
The following PEP approach outlines the communication methods to be utilized by the McCormick
Taylor project team. The components are well-defined but may be modified as the project progresses to
be responsive to the needs of key stakeholders, impacted communities within the study area, public
officials, and for the continued advancement of the project. The primary components include project
communications, project website, key stakeholder coordination, and public engagement.
91
8
Figure 4: People of Color
The McCormick Taylor project team will implement, maintain, and update the PEP in collaboration with
Frederick County over the course of this project. To ensure the quality of PEP materials, McCormick
Taylor employs a corporatewide Quality Control/Quality Assurance (QC/QA) Process for the overall
public involvement effort and materials generated by the McCormick Taylor project team.
4.1 Project Communications
Responding to Public Inquiries
Effective and timely project communications are fundamental to a successful public involvement
program. From responses to public inquiries to meeting invitations, it is critical that all project
communications contain accurate information, reflect consistency with overall project messaging, and
represent Frederick County in a professional and thoughtful manner. Accordingly, a protocol for
processing and tracking public inquiries received via the project website, written correspondence,
telephone, or other means will be developed for this project as directed by the County. The protocol
may include establishing standard content to open and close responses, standardized replies to sensitive
issues, and standardized copy lists so that key project team members consistently review and receive
copies of all outgoing responses. The protocol also helps minimize, if not eliminate, the possibility of an
untimely response or no response being provided.
92
9
Branding
An easily identifiable project brand will be created to distinguish this study from other studies or
projects completed for or associated with the Route 37 east bypass. This will foster public recognition of
materials, communications, and other related public-facing communications resources. The branding
will be utilized on the project website, meeting materials, reports, display boards, publications, and
electronic communications, including social media, and is featured in this document design.
Social Media
Social media helps expand project-related communications and engage traditionally underserved
populations throughout the project area. Research has shown that social media is a highly effective tool
to reach Latinos and African Americans; particularly via Facebook and Twitter, where representation is
higher than average. Frederick County social media sites will be used to share important project
information and events, including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. McCormick Taylor will
coordinate social media posts with the Frederick County Public Information Office. Social media
campaigns are supported through the development of project-related graphics and content designed
specifically for the identified platform. Content for use on social media is most effective when it includes
attention-getting visual explanations and concise copy.
Mass Communications
Project-related communications with the public are coordinated with Frederick County Project Manager
and Public Information Office. Email blasts and ‘e-bulletins’ will be developed as requested by the
County, and as the project progresses to keep the impacted community members and key stakeholders
informed. This will help to further the public’s comprehension of the project and foster an open and
continuing dialogue regarding the project. Potential email topics include meeting announcements,
project website updates, schedule updates, and other significant project developments.
Media Coordination
All project-related communications with the media are to be coordinated with Frederick County Project
Manager and Public Information Office. All media inquiries received by phone, electronically or in
person are re-directed to the Public Information Officer. McCormick Taylor will develop news releases,
media advisories and other project-related advertisements in draft format for review and comment by
the Frederick County Project Manager and the Public Information Office. The final versions of the news
releases, media advisories and other forms of project-related advertisements are to be placed or
disseminated as directed by Frederick County Public Information Office.
4.2 Project Website/Web page
The consultant project team will consult with Frederick County to establish a project web-based
resource on the County’s website. McCormick Taylor will design and develop content for the
website/web page. Additionally, two types of comprehensive content/graphic updates are planned for
the project website/web page over the course of the project as follows:
• Updates associated with milestones and progress during the study (including
materials/information about the two public meetings), and
• Updates after presenting the proposed alternatives.
93
10
4.3 Stakeholder Identification
McCormick Taylor and Frederick County worked together to develop a stakeholder database. It will be
updated at least twice throughout this phase of the project and includes property and business owners,
as well as local officials within the study area. The database serves as a stakeholder list to be utilized for
information-sharing.
Fifteen stakeholders were identified for interviews as part of 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 study area. The interviews were conducted in the summer of 2023 and
will allow the project team to proactively cultivate relationships with stakeholders, establish points of
contact with local organizations and within the business communities, and establish reliable lines of
communication to share project updates.
The stakeholder list will be updated regularly as the project development progresses.
4.4 Public Engagement
Public Meetings
Two public meetings will be held to engage, educate, and inform the public. The first meeting will be
scheduled for Fall 2023 (November Transportation Forum) and will present the updated draft purpose
and need statement for the project based on the consultant team analyses. A second public meeting will
be held in Spring 2024 for the presentation of the proposed alternative concepts to carry forward for
more detailed evaluation, analysis, and design.
If a meeting space is not available in the County Office, the project team will select a meeting venue that
is accessible to all people in the community. Participants will be able to access the meeting in-person or
online on the County website following the in-person session.
Traditional media and public meeting promotion often does not always reach disadvantaged and
environmental justice communities. McCormick Taylor will identify methods to inform these groups of
the public meetings as directed by the County.
In coordination with Frederick County, McCormick Taylor will prepare advertisements, social media
posts, invitations, handouts, presentations, graphic displays, comment forms, sign-in sheets, nametags,
and other material needed for the meetings as appropriate. Following the public meeting, meeting
materials will be posted on the County website unless otherwise directed by the County.
A summary for each meeting will be prepared and will include documentation of notifications, materials,
attendance, and follow-up actions for project documentation.
5. AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that individuals with disabilities be provided equal
opportunity to participate in or benefit from public services, programs, and activities provided by all
state and local governments. In conjunction with the implementation of this PEP, Frederick County and
the consultant project team have considered the needs of individuals with disabilities. In addition to
seeking out those individuals who are often under-represented in this process, Frederick County and the
94
11
consultant project team are committed to encouraging the involvement of individuals with disabilities to
gain their invaluable perspective on the attitudes and needs of a vital component of the community for
whom the transportation project is being implemented.
To accommodate individuals with hearing, speech, vision or mobility limitations, accessibility and/or
auxiliary aids or services needed for communications and participation in project-related public events
are made available upon requests received at least 48 hours before the date of the scheduled event.
Public meetings are also held in facilities that are accessible to individuals with physical disabilities. All
public notices and advertisements for public meetings will include Frederick County contact information
for individuals needing special assistance due to a physical disability to participate.
6. QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE
All materials developed by McCormick Taylor and our sub consultant team members are subject to
McCormick Taylor’s Quality Control/Quality Assurance Process (QC/QA). The QC/ QA Process ensures
that our project deliverables are technically accurate, appropriate, complete, satisfy the expectations of
Frederick County, and meet the project needs.
All draft and final versions of project-related materials designed for public consumption will undergo an
internal quality control review before delivery to Frederick County. Final versions of public engagement
materials will also include a quality assurance review prior to delivery to Frederick County.
7. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE
The timeline of public engagement activities shown below in Figure 5 is based on the current overall
project schedule and is subject to change. The schedule is updated as needed to reflect changes in the
program’s components and/or the progress of the project development process.
Figure 5: Public Involvement Activities Schedule
95
Community Context
Audit Interview
Summary
July 2023
FREDERICKCOUNTY
VA
WV
CLARKECOUNTY
WINCHESTER
SHENANDOAH COUNTY
WARREN COUNTY
STUDYAREA
WV
96
July 28, 2023
1
Community Context Audit Interview Summary
Interview outreach of up to 15 stakeholders began on July 14, 2023, via phone. Stakeholders who were
reached were given the op�on to take the interview at the �me of the phone call or to schedule a future
date for a phone, Microso� (MS) Teams video, or in-person interview. Barry Schnoor, Director, Physical
Plant, Shenandoah University, and Jeff Buetner, Interim Economic Development Authority Execu�ve
Director, opted for a phone interview. Eight interviewees opted for an MS Teams video interview. All
interviews were recorded for accuracy and with permission from each interviewee. No one requested an
in-person interview. By July 18, 2023, the ini�al outreach to the 15 stakeholders was completed. If the
phone was not answered, a voice mail was le�. Follow-up emails were sent if our ini�al calls were not
returned as requested. Ten stakeholders were interviewed. There were four stakeholders who did not
respond to the invita�on to take part in the interviews.
It is also worthy of note that the informa�on received and summarized below represents the collec�ve
opinions of the interviewees. This feedback and summary informa�on will only be u�lized for the
purposes of the community context audit.
Completed Interviews (10):
• Larry Oliver, Frederick County Fire and Rescue
• Whit Wagner, Fort Collier
• Chris Durant, Navy Federal Credit Union
• Cynthia Schnieder, Top of VA Chamber
• Jeff Buetner, 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
Unsuccessful Interview Contacts:
• Lenny Millholland, Frederick County Sheriff’s Office
• Seth Levy, Shenandoah Agency on Aging
• Abbey Rembold, Valley Health System
• Jus�n Kerns, Winchester Frederick County Conven�on & Visitors Bureau
Themes
• Allevia�ng traffic conges�on and reducing crashes on I-81 is key to improving mobility in
Frederick County.
97
July 28, 2023
2
• Traffic conges�on and tractor trailers on local roads are caused by drivers avoiding traffic
conges�on on I-81.
• Traffic conges�on 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 conges�on.
• Alterna�ve forms of transporta�on are valued and need to be improved and expanded: walking,
biking, public transit.
• Frederick County’s loca�on (proximity to I-81, Virginia Inland Port, Frederick County Regional
Airport) is ideal for the warehouse/manufacturing/freight industry, which is resul�ng in
increased truck/tractor trailer traffic.
• Roadway infrastructure capaci�es 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 of an increase in remote work since the COVID-19 pandemic.
98
July 28, 2023
3
Interview Summaries by Topic
Commuter Concerns
• I-81 has a perceived high volume of traffic and a perceived high rate of crashes.
o Capacity does not appear to be, based on interviewee input, sufficient for the needs of
the community.
o Safety appears to be an issue on I-81. There is a high concentra�on of crashes on I-81
and the interchanges – this will be verified and validated through the study traffic
analysis.
o The par�al clover leaf and diamond shape designs of the I-81 interchanges are thought
to contribute to traffic conges�on.
• I-81 interchanges/exits of concern:
Interchanges where development is occurring are problema�c at peak �mes. At these loca�ons
there is limited land, which is challenging for making improvements. Interchange traffic levels
appear to be maxed out and the known growth that is occurring cause concerns that level of
service below expecta�ons.
o 317
o 310
o 313: Signal �ming causes traffic to back up.
o 315: Where Route 7 comes in, especially going westbound in the evening
o Route 11 & I-81 interchange (north of Winchester City): On-off ramp, convergence of
major arteries, unsynchronized signals, industrial park, and manufacturing plant appear
to contribute to conges�on.
o I-66 and I-81 interchange: When there is a crash, there is 5 to 10 miles of traffic
conges�on between Winchester City and the interchange.
o Route 50 and Route 522 interchange with I-81: Especially during rush hour.
Future growth/developments are planned and could contribute to conges�on in the following
areas:
o 321 (Route 672)
o 323 (Route 669)
o 307 (Stephen City) & Stephen’s City Bridge (Route 277 – south of this study area)
o 302 (Middletown) Route 627 – south of this study area
o 277 (south of Winchester City) -Bowman’s Crossing, Route 614
• Development and growth in other areas, combined with cars and trucks trying to bypass traffic
on I-81, is increasing conges�on on other routes.
99
July 28, 2023
4
o 7/Leesburg Pike: especially during rush hour since it catches commuters from DC to the
Winchester area.
o 37
o 50/17
o 522
o 11 (Clearbrook and Stevenson areas)
o Between Route 50 and City of Winchester, especially at Victory Avenue.
Currently, Route 50 has two lanes in each direc�on with turning lanes at some
intersec�ons. Will the length of these turning lanes be sufficient for future
traffic?
o 661/Redbud Road: On-off ramps are misaligned, and traffic signal sequences are off.
• Local roads are also seeing increased traffic.
o Senseny Road: Experiencing a lot of development growth; two-lanes might not be
sufficient for future traffic.
o Tasker Road: Tractor trailer traffic
o Pleasant Valley Road at Millwood Avenue (near Shenandoah University)
• Other Areas experiencing traffic congestion:
o Bottlenecks around the West Virginia border.
• Rush hour
o Exists and is getting worse: 8:00 AM, 3:30/4:00 PM
o Commuter Destinations outside of Frederick County:
• Washington, D.C. (Frederick County is the “new suburb of Washington, D.C.”)
Cumberland, Maryland
• Lack of public transit in Frederick County.
• Lack of alternate routes:
o There are limited east-west connections through the County.
o Many roads feed right into downtown Winchester City, instead of being able to bypass.
Development/Growth
• Infrastructure
o Capacities at present are not enough for the scale and volume of developments coming
up.
o Development needs to happen where infrastructure (u�li�es, water/sewer, roads)
already exists or where it can be delivered in a short �me period. Those areas are few
and far between.
100
July 28, 2023
5
• A lot of development and growth in the County, especially in the north and towards the eastern
side.
• Residen�al, retail, and mixed-use developments causing more traffic:
o Crosspointe Center
o Crossover Boulevard: Recently completed road improvements.
• The Shops at Crossover Boulevard: >20 acres of developable commercial land
• 311-unit apartment complex
• Home2 Suite by Hilton hotel: 90 guests
• Trex Co, Inc.
• Hang 10 Car Wash
• Carmax Dealership
• First Bank & Trust Co
• Known planned industrial developments brining more traffic:
o Carmeus: Stone manufacturer with several stone quarries in Clearbrook and Middletown
o One Logis�cs: Route 50 connec�on to the airport. (Also known as Carpers Valley project:
300 acres under development located on Route 50.)
o “Fruit Hill” mixed use development: 2.1 million square feet of warehouse space. Equus
Development: Applica�on has been withdrawn.
o Valley Innova�on Park: A 147-acre development with advanced, bioscience
manufacturing located southwest of 310 Interchange with access to I-81.
o Planned industrial zoning near Exit 321/323
o More industrial land uses are being developed towards the northern part of the study
area.
• Other development concerns:
o Development near northern part of I-81, near Exit 319 – a JJJ bus stopping area.
o Concerns about traffic management during planned construc�on at the Route 50-522
and I-81 interchange.
o Speculated expansion of airport could, if ever realized, bring more traffic conges�on.
o Route 37 east bypass will have on-ramps to Route 50, causing more traffic conges�on.
o Subdivisions cause sprawl and require people to drive to their des�na�ons.
o People who work in Frederick County can’t afford to live in Frederick County, causing
people to commute further to/from work.
• Developers work closely with the County to minimize negative impacts to the community:
o Developer participation in transportation improvements through revenue-sharing,
proffers, and “smart-scale” projects (essentially formula grants)
o Developers can be asked to put up money, about $10,000 per acre, plus setbacks,
easements, and right of way
101
July 28, 2023
6
Historical Resources/Environmental Concerns
• Air pollution from tractor trailers.
• Lack of EV infrastructure in the County.
• “Every field” is a historical site from the Revolutionary War era.
• Natural beauty and history of Frederick County provides a sense of identity and quality of life
• Excessive transportation infrastructure can also negatively impact water runoff etc.
• If uncurbed, development moving westward can threaten natural and agricultural land that
forms an economic and cultural foundation for the area.
• Expanding Route 37 on the west side of Frederick County can help relieve traffic, but it is
important to see how its building will impact the environment.
Large Trucks/Tractor Trailers
• The area is genera�ng more truck traffic every year. I-81 is the only major north-south route on
the east coast that has no major ci�es or bridges. This allows truckers to move more quickly than
other interstates, like I-95. As a result, the Winchester City and Frederick County area is a major
hub for industrial/warehouse/trucking.
• Major distribution hubs cause a large volume of freight flowing through the area.
• Large trucks/tractor trailer travel patterns:
o Most trucks are on I-81 or the major arteries.
o Truckers use a few local roads to get between industrial parks and I-81.
o Truckers stop between Exits 317 and 323 before crossing over into the West Virginia
border.
o Truckers use “all the local roads” along I-81 to avoid traffic conges�on on I-81 and the
interchanges.
o GPS is rerou�ng tractor trailers to local roads to avoid traffic conges�on.
o A lot of truckers have no op�on but to go through downtown, because of the way exits
are designed.
• Route 50 to Route 522: Truckers coming from Maryland or West Virginia
• Welltown Pike (coming from Stonewall Industrial Park): When traffic is backed
up on Exit 317.
• Fredrick County retail industry genera�ng freight:
o Amazon
o Walmart
o Lowe’s
o Home Depot
o Trex
102
July 28, 2023
7
Emergency Services
• Traffic conges�on on I-81 and the interchanges causes the volunteer fire company and
emergency services to use circuitous routes to reach emergencies, especially during rush hour:
o Route 522-50 corridor at Millwood Pike.
o Intersection of I-81 and Berryville Pike (around Route 7).
o In the City of Winchester, because of delays at traffic signals.
• Reducing emergency response �me is always a priority for the airport.
• By Shenandoah University, there is a planned replacement of the Route 50 bridge over I-81. As a
result, Route 50 entry/exit to residen�al halls will close. Concerns about fire rescue response
�me and ability to get to that part of campus.
School Bus Traffic Concerns
• Some issues with people passing stopped school buses with red lights activated.
• Some concerns of speeding in residential areas.
• Could be congestion concerns for schools near industrial areas, such as Stonewall Elementary on
Route 11 north.
• Potential concerns on hilly roads:
o Armel Elementary on Route 522.
o Blind spots at Greenwood Mill Elementary School, off Channing Road and High Cliff
Drive.
Frederick County Regional Airport/Virginia Inland Port
• Currently, neither location is a heavy node for freight operations, so they don't attract large
volumes of truck traffic
o However, several Frederick County businesses and industrial warehouses and
manufacturing companies heavily rely upon the airport and Inland Port.
o Manufacturing companies rely on private plane delivery of parts (faster than FedEx).
o Manufacturing companies have several trucks (sometimes 20) that travel to/from Inland
Port every day.
o Some fright comes in from arterial highways, namely Routes 50 and 522.
• Connections to airport and Inland Port could be a need in the future depending on the regional
growth and expansion of the manufacturing and trucking industry. Current connections might
impact freight movement timeframes.
• If future plans for airport expansion would materialize, an increase in truck traffic would need to
be considered.
103
July 28, 2023
8
o Aircra� manufacturing is a targeted growth sector, which could generate new ac�vity in
freight and handling.
• Virginia Inland Port
o Located in Warren County.
o Currently, the four-lane road system at the Inland Port feels sufficient.
• A lot of freight is transported by train (Norfolk Southern and CSX).
Other Transportation and Demographic Studies
• Logistics One Traffic Study
• Study of traffic light at Route 50 and Independence Avenue
• Crosspointe TIA, by Glaize Development
• Carpers Valley project TIA
• Equus Development TIA
• Rumor of a private entity in talks with the State to add a toll road and build and manage the
third and fourth lanes of I-81.
• Transportation and demographic studies concerns:
o 2020 Census could be underestimating total population in Frederick County.
o Understand “real” versus “projected” traffic numbers. VDOT’s guidelines overestimate
traffic projections, and most developers who carry out their own studies are meant to
follow them. Some might have published their actual counts in a traffic impact analysis
or an appendix as part of a rezoning study.
o Reevaluation of Route 522, and a potential relocation and realignment of the
intersection of Routes 50 and 522
Pedestrian/Bicyclist Concerns
• Most local roads are like country roads with so� shoulders, no curb, guter, or walking paths;
though people regularly try to walk and bike to/from downtown.
• No shoulders on rural roads.
• No sidewalks in subdivisions.
Other Recommended Stakeholders
• Public Safety Communications Department
• Planning Department, Frederick County and Winchester City
• Charles Daniels, VP, Fortessa, and Chair of the Board of Top of Virginia Regional Chamber
[crdaniels@fortessa.com]
• Chris Boies, Clarke County Administrator [cboies@clarkecounty.gov]
• Adielle Rivera, Loan Officer with a local business, can reach out to Hispanic residents and
business-owners [adielle.rivera@guildmortgage.net]
• Ed Podboy, Logistics One, 703-608-9393 (mobile)
104
July 28, 2023
9
• Facebook group: “What’s Happening in Winchester and Frederick County, Virginia”
• Jason Akins Developments
• Industry: HP Hood, Trex, Rubbermaid, Southeastern Container, American Woodmark Cabinetry
• Mike Perry of Perry, civil contractor who deals with traffic and trucks in the area
• Denny Perry, quarry owner and truck operator
• Dave Foley, Cargo Operator, Winchester Regional Airport
• Chris Rucker, Valley Health System [crucker2@valleyhealthlink.com]
• Jason Craig, EdD, BCBA, VHS Director, Community Health, 540-536-5949 (direct line)
[jcraig@valleyhealthlink.com]
• Winchester Wheelmen
• WinFred MPO bike and pedestrian advocacy committee
Other Groups
• Spanish materials (18% of the City of Winchester are Hispanic)
• There is not an overarching voice for businesses. The Chamber and “EDOs” can help promote
public engagement opportuni�es to the businesses.
Stakeholder Ideas
• Build safer connectors (beter shoulders and curbs) to enable people to walk and bike.
• Expand public transit to the County, especially the Westview Business Park Center, and major
industrial and manufacturing employers. This could help atract talent.
• Expand bike lanes and sidewalks.
• Create a parkway with at-grade crossings and traffic moving at 45-55 mph, instead of a limited
access highway. This would help move domes�c traffic stuck in I-81 traffic conges�on.
o Would also allow for more development that can �e in with secondary feeder roads
coming in at at-grade crossings.
• Realign Redbud Road on the east side of I-81 to fix signal �ming issues.
• Coordinate with City of Winchester on improving bike-ability, walkability, and public
transporta�on, including on-demand transit.
• Efficiency measures need to be put in place on I-81 so there aren’t issues/interac�ons between
tractor trailers and personal vehicles.
• Improvements to Coverstone Road through the One Logis�cs Park could help with reducing
emergency response �me.
• Improve Route 522 connection between airport and Inland Port; currently traffic congestion
prohibits truckers to arrive on time.
• Install shoulders on the rural/county roads to benefit the safety of bicyclists and drivers.
105
Lasted updated: July 14, 2023 1
Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study
Community Context Audit Interview Questions
Subject: Commuter Concerns
1. Are you aware of transportation issues that affect local drivers’ ability to reach their destinations
on time?
2. Other than I-81, are you aware of any commuter routes where local drivers experience traffic
congestion? If so, what are those routes?
Subject: Development/Growth
3. Are you aware of any recent or known planned developments that will generate truck traffic, or
a large number of vehicles in the study area?
4. We are aware of the County’s urban growth areas and sewer/water service area. Are there any
areas where growth/development should be limited or restricted?
5. As part of this study, we are looking at transportation studies completed by Frederick County
and the WinFred MPO. Are you aware of studies developed by private industry, developers, or
other governmental agencies that can help us better understand population or economic/job
growth, traffic generators, proposed development, etc.?
6. Do you know if developers are being asked to participate in transportation improvements,
through actual construction or transportation impact fees (TIFs), etc.?
7. Do you have any concerns about the transportation system impacting the environment or
cultural and historic resources within the study area?
Subject: Large Trucks
8. For non-businesses: Are there large trucks, such as tractor trailers or freight trucks, on
local/residential roads?
9. For businesses: Do large trucks, such as tractor trailers or freight trucks, belonging to your
business use local/residential roads?
106
Lasted updated: July 14, 2023 2
Subject: Emergency Services
10. Do you have knowledge of any specific emergency services/first responders concerns in the
study area?
Subject: School Bus Traffic Concerns
11. Are you aware of issues that school bus drivers and students have when traveling to/from
school (conflicts with freight, access issues, speeding, etc.)? If so, what are they and where are
the locations?
Subject: Frederick County, VA Regional Airport
12. Is there any freight handling/shipping occurring at the regional airport? If so, which industries or
companies are generating the freight? How is the freight getting to the airport).
Subject: Virginia Inland Port
13. Do you have a relationship with the Virginia Inland Port? If so, what is that relationship and will
it have an impact on traffic in general or to/from the Airport?
Subject: Stakeholder Preferences/Demographics
14. Are you interested in receiving updates on the study? How do you prefer to receive your
information?
15. Do you live and/or work in the study Area? What is your ZIP code?
16. Is there another individual or organization that you believe should be considered a key
stakeholder in conjunction with this study? What is their name and contact information?
17. Are there any populations, communities, or groups in Frederick County who may need
assistance to participate in a public meeting and/or need assistance with accessing project -
related information in either a print or electronic format? For example, language barriers, lack
of internet access, or no access to a personal vehicle.
107
1
Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study
Purpose and Needs Statements Survey Summary
The Purpose and Needs Statements survey was initially shared with public meeting attendees at the
Frederick County Transportation Forum on November 16, 2023. A digital version of the survey was made
available to the public from December 20, 2023, through January 31, 2024. The digital version was
posted on the Frederick County website to extend the opportunity for public input through the end of
January 2024. A detailed compilation of the survey responses received (paper copies and digital) was
provided to the County at the conclusion of the public comment period. A total of 148 surveys were
submitted.
The following summation is provided as a general overview of the survey results including the total
number of responses received, the number/percentage of respondents who selected ‘agree’ or
‘disagree’ as their response to each statement as presented, and the number of respondents who
did not provide a response to specific statements.
To receive a copy of the detailed version of the Purpose and Needs Statements survey summary,
please contact Alexandra Castrechini at Amcastrechini@mccormicktaylor.com or by phone at
(804) 915-1584.
148 Purpose and Needs Statement Surveys Received
# of Responses/Statement
Purpose and Needs
Statement Topics
Agree with
Statements as
Presented
Disagree with
Statements as
Presented
No Response
Comments
1. Draft Purpose 139 (95%) 8 (5%) 1
2. Draft Need –
Bicycle/Pedestrian
104 (86%) 17 (14%) 0
3. Draft Need - Congestion
95 (88%) 13 (12%) 40
4. Draft Need: Safety 92 (91%) 9 (9%) 47
5. Draft Need: Interstate 81 78 (79%) 21 (21%) 49
Additional Comments 28
Total Responses
508 Agree 68 Disagree 137 No Response 28
108
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
1 / 13
94.31%116
5.69%7
Q1 Do you agree with the Purpose statement as presented?
Answered: 123 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 123
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
109
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
2 / 13
Q2 If no, please state below the basis for your disagreement and how your
concern may be addressed.
Answered: 8 Skipped: 116
#RESPONSES DATE
1 The Route 37 bypass is a pipe dream. The County has out built itself in the areas required to
fulfill it (i.e. Stonewall Industrial Park). It would cost the County a tremendous amount of
money that c ould be better spent elsewhere.
1/21/2024 12:11 PM
2 But s pending money on Cons ultant s really is n’t the answer. Open your ey es and the answers
to most of the is sues are obv ious.
1/20/2024 6:28 PM
3 Too many buz z words around important issues!1/19/2024 6:08 PM
4 I believ e spending money to create a plan that will never be funded is a waste of tax pay er
money. I would recommend utiliz ing the last plan that inc luded RT 37 around the eas tern side
of FC.
1/19/2024 4:01 PM
5 Route 37 will not be built on the proposed route bec ause neither the state nor local gov ernment
has bought the land.
1/19/2024 10:57 AM
6 Bec aus e it's ev ident of the work needed on Rt 7 and Rt 50. Also remov al of st op lights and
signs will keep traf fic mov ing constant ly. Maintain what y ou have already. Pleas e hav e a look
in Loco to s ee their motorway s etups .
1/19/2024 10:10 AM
7 Need t o ex pand on, brief description of, or link to what is the propos ed Route 37 is .1/19/2024 7:48 AM
8 Stop the mass building and roadway improv ements won’t be needed 1/18/2024 11:26 PM
110
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
3 / 13
86.14%87
13.86%14
Q3 Do the Bicycle/Pedestrian Needs statements encompass the mobility
issues in the project area adequately?
Answered: 101 Sk ipped: 23
TOTAL 101
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
111
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
4 / 13
Q4 If no, please explain what bicycle/pedestrian need(s) should be
included and the area where the need(s) exist.
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 112
#RESPONSES DATE
1 The statements seem s omewhat disjoint ed. 2014 = infrastruc ture is lac k ing, but it seems that
what does exis t is kinda OK. Then there is the totally subjective guess that current
infrastructure is inadequate. Though subject ive, my personal obs erv ation is that bik ing needs
are woefully and embarras s ing lac king, inc luding c ommunity connec tivity and linkages.
1/21/2024 12:54 PM
2 Focus more on pedes trian t raff ic as bik ers use the road ins tead of paved bike paths.1/21/2024 12:12 PM
3 This isn’t something that needs addressed as a priorit y.1/20/2024 6:28 PM
4 It pres umes roads are the problem, not having s idewalks and other pav ed equivalents away
from the roads!
1/19/2024 6:11 PM
5 2014 was 10 years ago and little has been done to address shortc omings in this area. I believe
the County returned $ around this time that c ould have expanded the shoulder on Sens eny Rd.
Do not do a survey if leadership has no interest in acting.
1/19/2024 4:06 PM
6 They are dangerous. t hey refuse to follow t raff ic laws that pertain to them. There is already and
iss ue wit h the traffic. Why ball it up with cyclist s?
1/19/2024 10:11 AM
7 The county is too large for bike travel alone to suff iciently address the majority of travel needs ,
though I am in favor of inc reas ing available bike trav el. Increases in public t rans port seems
more viable with depots at larger residential areas, ex ample Shawneeland
1/19/2024 12:01 AM
8 None.1/18/2024 11:27 PM
9 Don't need no bik e lanes 1/18/2024 8:52 PM
10 Bic ycles and pedes trians is not a priority and s hould not be included in any transport ation
plans . It’s abs urd.
1/18/2024 8:32 PM
11 60% of the network was deemed adequate or adequat e?” Something isn’t right here. The two
are not a c hoice. Cons tituents should be provided the criteria. What is the other 40% id 60 is
advanc ed riders or wors e? 40% is rideable.That s eems unlik ely.
1/18/2024 7:32 PM
12 Apple Pie Ridge Road 1/16/2024 4:16 PM
112
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
5 / 13
89.66%78
10.34%9
Q5 Do the Congestion Needs statements encompass the mobility issues in
the project area adequately?
Answered: 87 Sk ipped: 37
TOTAL 87
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
113
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
6 / 13
Q6 If no, please explain what congestion need(s) should be included and
the area where the need(s) exist. Additional space is available for feedback
on page 6 of this survey.
Answered: 12 Sk ipped: 112
#RESPONSES DATE
1 All that said, why is a new 700ish home s ubdiv ision being allow t o c onnect to VA-7 in the area
noted? Again, obvious answers and people with k nowledge are not managing wit h the public’s
best interes t.
1/20/2024 6:31 PM
2 All four areas mentioned require hav e issues, but most of the stated s olutions seem to be
based on political as s umptions!
1/19/2024 6:15 PM
3 New dev elopments and increased t raff ic along Senseny Rd need to be addres s ed, particularly
from the bridge on Sens eny Rd that div ides Winc hes ter and Frederick County to Senseny Glen
Dr. Both turning lef t onto Senseny Rd from a side road where there is no light and turning left
off of Senseny Rd to a side road where there is no light are is s ues. In addition during higher
traf fic times , the s toplight-ed int ers ec tion at Sens eny Rd and Greenwood Rd often does not
mov e bec ause the turn lane from Senseny Rd to Greenwood Rd is not long enough.
1/19/2024 5:40 PM
4 no more houses please 1/19/2024 5:32 PM
5 I believ e t he last bullet should s tate FC will not be able to approv e future new home
construc tion plans until transportation and other infras tructure needs are addressed.
1/19/2024 4:10 PM
6 Think of the implic ations on s c hools and bus commutes !1/19/2024 11:23 AM
7 These ques tions are overly complicated for your ev eryday person. Even VDOT employees
don't k now what they mean unless you taught them.
1/19/2024 10:13 AM
8 There is significant traf fic c oming east to west that is trying to get to the west of the City of
Winches ter that has to go through Winchest er bec aus e there is no other direct or higher speed
route. Connec tion from Route 7 south c onnect ing 7 and 50 to Route 37 would alleviate the
conges tion at all the conges tion point s lis ted in the draft s tatement. A high speed on off ramp
road lik e 37 wes t of Winc hester east of Winc hester would HIGHLY benef it traffic if it could
route traffic from Rout e 7 and 50 to Exit 310 c onnect ing t o Route 37.
1/19/2024 7:57 AM
9 Warrior drive does not need to be c ontinued thru. We need to stop building and slow the
growth. The county lac k s all infrast ruc ture and needs to f ix all issues before any more hous es
are built
1/18/2024 10:20 PM
10 Additional dev elopment off Rt7 at the Fred co/Clark e Co line will increase volume on 7.1/18/2024 8:34 PM
11 Conges tion on Fairfax Pike, Main Street, and the Interat ate 81 307 interchange f ar supersedes
any of these projects. It’s an embarrassment it’s not t he number one priority.
1/18/2024 8:33 PM
12 Merge lanes at ent ranc es to 81 and exit lanes off of 81 are too short and do not allow adequate
dis tanc e t o mitigate c ongestion.
1/18/2024 7:39 PM
114
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
7 / 13
91.46%75
8.54%7
Q7 Do the Safety Needs statements encompass the mobility issues in the
project area adequately?
Answered: 82 Sk ipped: 42
TOTAL 82
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
115
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
8 / 13
Q8 If no, please explain what safety need(s) should be included and the
area where the need(s) exist.
Answered: 8 Skipped: 116
#RESPONSES DATE
1 It s eems that the focus areas s olely involv e Rt 7. What other geographic problem/growth areas
are under consideration to address ? 340, 522, 277, 11, etc .
1/21/2024 12:58 PM
2 See previous ans wers…..1/20/2024 6:31 PM
3 We need more roads and lanes on I81 1/19/2024 4:13 PM
4 Mos t of this will never be done bec ause the money goes to NOVA and RIC.1/19/2024 11:00 AM
5 Nobody unders tands your c raz y analytic s .1/19/2024 10:14 AM
6 Rus h hour traffic effect s needs to be studied on Sens eny. Signific ant traffic is diverting off of
Valley Mill (7) down Greenwood to us e Senseny to cross through Winchest er t o get to 50 or
522 to avoid the conges tion on 7 f rom Greenwood into Winches ter on 7. Again a high s peed
limited ac c ess road from 7 and 50 to Route 37 would eliminate signific ant conges tion.
1/19/2024 8:04 AM
7 The problem I see is lack of police enf orc ement in the areas in ques tion.1/18/2024 9:36 PM
8 Slowing traffic or rather c reating an atmosphere where drivers obs erv e pos ted speed limit may
be necessary to improve saf ety on rt 7 between Winc hes ter and Clarke county.
1/18/2024 7:23 PM
116
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
9 / 13
77.78%63
22.22%18
Q9 Do the Interstate 81 Needs statements encompass the mobility issues
in the project area adequately?
Answered: 81 Sk ipped: 43
TOTAL 81
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
117
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
10 / 13
Q10 If no, please explain what Interstate 81 need(s) should be included
and the area where the need(s) exist.
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 104
#RESPONSES DATE
1 I81 needs to be widened from MM296 to WV st ate line not just in the area of 313 to 317.1/21/2024 6:47 PM
2 Exit 310 needs much more improvement 1/21/2024 1:32 PM
3 There are already traffic cameras at the 317.1/21/2024 12:14 PM
4 You guys really c an’t figure out the basics…1/20/2024 6:32 PM
5 Exit 317 needs t o be done ASAP.1/20/2024 12:03 AM
6 Exit 307 conges tion issues are worse than at 313. Not sure why this would be ex c luded from
this study s ince massiv e hous ing developments are being created whic h will further
exacerbat e this problem.
1/19/2024 8:59 PM
7 Need t o add a longer entrance ramp at mile marker 317 NB and SB due to the incline and
larger v ehicles trying to merge ont o the interstate at a slower s peed due to t he incline.
1/19/2024 8:33 PM
8 We need 3 lanes from the WV line through all of FC. Unfortunately I81 is one of the f ew roads
in FC moving local traffic north and s outh of Winchester.
1/19/2024 4:16 PM
9 Exc eption of dis agreement is 37 11 interc hange is worse becaus e it's s lower & does n't f low.
Should have been clov erleaf wit h merges not traffic signals
1/19/2024 1:58 PM
10 I-81 should be widened to 3 lanes (northbound and southbound) for all of Frederic k County VA
to allev iate traffic conges tion and increase saf ety.
1/19/2024 8:31 AM
11 Widening should go from 321 to 310 t o ac tually facilitate reduc ing conges tion. Widening
between 313 and 315 is already ac c omplis hed and helps and from 317 to 315 may help but it
is limit ed in vis ion as traffic c ontinues to build. To really plan for the future widening from 321
to 310 will facilitate North South I-81 traffic for many years to come while helping to facilitate
loc al traffic that may use the ex its between 310 and 321 to get to work, sc hool, appointments
etc wit hout the need to go through the city.
1/19/2024 8:12 AM
12 I think the entire length of I-81 through Frederic k County s hould be widened, not jus t a few
spot s. And what will the t raff ic cameras help with?
1/18/2024 10:29 PM
13 81 needs to be 3-4 lanes in both direct ions f rom wv line to shen co line 1/18/2024 10:23 PM
14 We s hould begin widening to 6 lanes beginning at the WV line just as WV is doing and
complete this through Frederic k County.
1/18/2024 10:08 PM
15 Again, a lac k of police enforcement is what is needed here!1/18/2024 9:37 PM
16 The three lanes may address this- but there is a need to get slow mov ing truc k s out of t he lef t
lane ex ac erbating the conges tion issue.
1/18/2024 8:37 PM
17 The 307 interchange is vas tly more important than any other project.1/18/2024 8:35 PM
18 Adding a right turn lane to enter I-81 South f rom Route 37 South (Ex it 310). It c an be
dangerous to merge onto I-81 South f rom Route 37 South because of c ongestion from traffic
coming from Route 11.
1/18/2024 7:41 PM
19 A separate truc k lane and longer merge lanes are needed.1/18/2024 7:41 PM
20 I’m not s ure widening I81 is a worthwhile invest ment. In plac es where I81 has been widened I
find the t hird lane is either not nec essary, creates bottlenec ks when reducing bac k down to 2
lanes , or driv es traffic from loc al roads onto the int ers tate (Jev ons Paradox). If the primary
iss ue wit h traffic on 81 is related to ac c ident c ongestion, does the third lane c reate any
significant improvement in the event of an accident?
1/18/2024 7:29 PM
118
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
11 / 13 119
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
12 / 13
Q11 Please utilize the remaining space to provide additional project-related
comments or questions. If a response is needed, please provide your
name and email or US Postal Address so that we may respond
accordingly.
Answered: 20 Sk ipped: 104
#RESPONSES DATE
1 Exit 307 causes major conges tion on Fairfax Pike. Extending Rt37 t o Warrior Drive could help
alleviate some of this is s ue.
1/21/2024 6:48 PM
2 Explore adding a right turn lane at greenwood road and rt 7 light 1/20/2024 7:26 PM
3 Until the polit icians profiting of the Count y’s growth are replac ed with people that unders tand
the most bas ic traffic engineering principles , Frederick County is doomed. Remember, a
straight line is t he best way to get from point A to B.
1/20/2024 6:34 PM
4 Fix the traffic issues at Rout e 7 and I 81 (ex it 317) and at Ex it 307.1/19/2024 9:00 PM
5 Traffic in the route 11/81/37 area des perately needs to be addres sed 1/19/2024 8:55 PM
6 We are was ting local taxpay er money c reating plans state lawmakers are not c ommitted to
funding. Our elected state repres entatives need to get more s tate trans portation money for our
area. They are failing in this regard. Not s ure this plan does much more than spend loc al tax
dollars instead of using them on s erv ices for our residents .
1/19/2024 4:30 PM
7 Timing of traffic light needs to be addres s ed, espec ially at the inters ection of US 50 & 522 as
well as on 522 directly south of US 50
1/19/2024 3:04 PM
8 While I agree with the previous s tatements wit hin t he s tudy I c annot stress enough the need
for change in the traffic on rout e 11 from Old Charles town Rd to t he route 11 s plit into
downtown. The inability to merge traffic , the lights being improperly s taggered, and the traffic.
The current infrastructure does not meet the needs of the rapid ex pansion the area has
experienc ed.
1/19/2024 2:51 PM
9 Building the remainder of the route 37 loop on the eas t side of winc hester will make t raff ic in
this area immeas urably better.
1/19/2024 11:25 AM
10 I think even a toll lane “fast lane” on Rt 7 would help fund more polic e pres enc e to eliminate
speeding and people generally driving aggres s ively would be helpf ul as well as easing up some
of t he c ongestion.
1/19/2024 11:07 AM
11 Safety improv ements much needed on Rt7 between Frederick and Clark s Counties, partic ularly
the left turn from Rt7 westbound onto Valley Mill. And the c ongest ion at Rt7 and I 81 (too many
lraffic within a small s ection on 7) and the I81 Rt11/37 ex it (again too many traffic lights within
a s mall area c ontributing to t he c on.) Als o, t he traffic light timing cycles need adjus ted for the
light at Valley Mill to get onto I81 and Rt7.
1/19/2024 2:51 AM
12 Please s top the mas s s ubdivisions !1/18/2024 11:29 PM
13 The I 81 and 7 exit c ould be bet ter handled c urrent ly with better traffic signaingl in the mean
time. Thank you for this study
1/18/2024 11:17 PM
14 I appreciate t he c hanges that are being proposed. They are urgently needed as t he c ounty has
allowed continued growth wit hout c ons idering the infrastructure.
1/18/2024 10:11 PM
15 Inv estigat e the area polic e to find out why they are not enforc ing driving laws in thes e areas
adequately.
1/18/2024 9:38 PM
16 The Rt 11/81 intersec tion and ex tended s tretc h from Rutherford crossing to the start of 37 is
one of the mos t frustrating s tretc hes of road I’v e ev er encountered. There are too many lights
1/18/2024 8:39 PM
120
Eastern Frederic k County Transportation Study
13 / 13
that are not synchroniz ed. I ’m not sure what a divergent diamond is, but it s eems that adding
flyovers and eliminating light s would help.
17 If and when Warrior drive is ex tended to 37 Tas ker Rd will need improvements . Sev eral lef t
turns bet ween whit e oak and Tas k er lack lef t turn lanes. I believe that Warrior and Tasker
would be well s uited for s ome s ort of large traf fic c ircle des ign that could incorporate more safe
pedestrian cros sing. The same c ould be said for other int ers ec tions. Forc ed right turn only
from s ome neighborhoods with a short distanc e to a traffic c irc le where direction could be
changed would help s low traffic and eliminate left t urns and reduce crashes. The issues wit h
exit 307 need to be addressed as well. May be one direc tion c ros s ing at a time is a better
solution for the time being. J onathan Luety jluety@hotmail.c om
1/18/2024 8:09 PM
18 Exit 317/Route 11/Welltown Road/Red Bud Road area is a mess. Next to prioritiz e f ix in the
near term (2 y ears or less).
1/16/2024 7:24 PM
19 There needs to be an assessment of some “Quic k fix /Low Cost” areas. For example, there are
cont inuing wrecks at t he SB 310 Ex it on I-81. When y ou c ome down this ex it there is a
cont inuous “appearing” lane that s uddenly ends . There are no signs, no arrows on the
pavement , it jus t ends and y ou have two v ehicles s uddenly in the same lane. I know there are
others . Least ex perienced VDOT work ers need to driv e around and just f ollow the s igns or lack
of signs and indicators .. (To find out t he worst ones , hold a contest with VDOT workers with a
small c as h award or a day off.) Thanks for listening Brenda.belew@hotmail.com
1/16/2024 4:25 PM
20 Rural hous ing off of woods mill & burnt fac tory s houldn’t be affec ted.1/16/2024 4:12 PM
121
Winchester/Frederick County Regional Transportation Projects Public Meeting
Frederick County Administration Building
Board of Supervisors Room
Thursday, March 14, 2024
6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Meeting Agenda
1. Meeting Registration 5:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
2. Welcome and Introductions John Bishop, Assistant Director
Frederick County
3. EFCTS Transportation Study & Alexandria Castrechini, P.E.
Safe Streets for All Project Presentations Project Manager, McCormick
Taylor, Inc.
4. Visit Plans Displays & Complete Comment Forms
5. Meeting Concludes 8:00 p.m.
Accommodations:
Onsite Spanish Language Translator: Diana Patterson
122
Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study
Project Overview
Frederick County, Virginia has hired McCormick Taylor, Inc., an engineering, planning and environmental
consulting firm, to perform a 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. You can view a map of the study area on the
second page of this document.
Data collection and analysis efforts will focus on traffic data, including current and future projections
(generally a 20-year horizon). Traffic generated by new and pending development within, or that
influence the transportation network in the study area, will be included in the analyses. The traffic data
will be supplemented with existing background information and local knowledge provided by various key
stakeholders and the public. Opportunities for public engagement and input will be announced on the
County’s website, along with updates on the study.
The purpose of the study is to identify and document specific transportation needs. Possible solutions for
these needs will then be developed as concepts. The public will then have opportunities to provide input
on both the needs and any conceptual solutions. Once the conceptual solutions have been refined for
public comment, an implementation plan that is expected to include a prioritized list of improvements
with estimates of probable costs will be developed for the County’s use for implementation of funding
for transportation improvements in the study area.
The study team is aware of previous efforts to pursue a Route 37 east bypass around Winchester. A
bypass will be 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, beyond transportation improvements,
such as land use or access management controls, may also be included in the final plan.
123
Project Area for the Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study (EFCTS)
124
1
Public Comment Form
March 14, 2024
Thank you for attending our meeting this evening. The County and its EFCTS Consultant Project Team would
appreciate your feedback. Please place your completed form in the designated drop box or scan a copy of
your completed form and send it to Alexandra Castrechini at amcastrechini@mccormicktaylor.com. If you
would like to receive a response to your comment(s), please provide your name, email address or US Postal
Address in the box below so that we may respond accordingly. Thank you in advance for your participation.
Please note your comments/questions below and use the back of this sheet if you need additional space.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Email: _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
and/or
US Postal Address: ________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
(City) (State) Zip Code
125
2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
126
3
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
127
MEMORANDUM
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Date: May 10, 2024
To: Alexandra Castrechini Work Order Number: 45792.000
From: Jonathan Avner
Subject: EFCTS Traffic Study – Travel Demand Modeling Project: EFCTS Traffic Study
CC: Other recipients
The purpose of this memorandum is to document the development and use of the outputs of the WinFred Regional
Travel Demand Model for use in the EFCTS Traffic Study Update. Information provided in this memorandum includes
details regarding base model development with new zonal data, model validation, demographic comparisons,
demand analysis, and results that compare 2050 no build assumptions to 2050 future year alternative scenarios.
Development of EFCTS Traffic Study Model
WRA was provided the 2015 WinFred Regional Travel Demand Model to develop the alternative forecasts for this
study. In preparing the model for use in the study a new model base year of 2019 was defined as well as updating
the model to include the latest socioeconomic data from the MPO. The traffic analysis zones (TAZ) for the WinFred
Regional Travel Demand Model area are shown in Figure 1. 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
outlined in Figure 2.
128
May 8, 2024 Page 2 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 1 WinFred Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ)
129
May 8, 2024 Page 3 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 2: Study Area Zones
130
May 8, 2024 Page 4 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Zonal Data Updates
Using the socioeconomic data provided by the MPO, Table 1 provides a summary of the zonal demographic inputs
for the 2015 WinFred Regional Travel Demand Model and the new model base year of 2019.
Table 1: Zonal Demographic Totals (Source: MPO)
Variable 2015 2019
POP 106,316 119,846
HH 39,889 48,485
WORK 52,973 64,562
VEH 79,832 97,955
HTRET 6,132 7,152
IND 14,671 16,560
OFF 4,733 5,422
RET 7,097 6,062
SER 17,339 19,734
EMP 55,504 54,930
2019 Network Assumptions
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
as shown in Figure 3.
131
May 8, 2024 Page 5 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 3: Roadway Network Changes
132
May 8, 2024 Page 6 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Base Year (2019) Model Validation
The 2019 model results were evaluated against 2019 counts from VDOT’s database. The percent error by roadway
type and percent RMSE by volume group were calculated and compared against the documented 2015 model
validation results. Table 2 reports the percent error by Roadway Type. The Target or Criterion is based on the VDOT
Travel Model Policy Guidelines. Table 3 reports the Percent RMSE calculated by volume group with the assigned
Target or Criterion as established by VDOT.
Table 2: Percent Error by Facility Type
Roadway Type 2015 2019 Target
Freeway 3.0 3.6 +/- 7
Major Arterial -2.1 8.8 +/- 10
Minor Arterial -4.7 18.9 +/- 15
Collector & Local 2.7 22.5 +/- 20
Total 2.0 6.34 +/- 5
Table 3: Percent RMSE by Volume Group
Volume Group 2015 2019 Target
0 – 5000 29.09 38.2 100
5000 – 10000 25.36 38.2 45
10000 – 20000 19.64 17.2 35
20000 – 50000 6.81 11.8 27
Total 19.12 18.4 40
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 criterion as established by VDOT for the
region and on higher level facilities, the model is considered suitable for the evaluation included in this study.
133
May 8, 2024 Page 7 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Demand Comparison Using Streetlight
At the request of VDOT, comparisons were made between the 2019 Winfred Regional Travel Demand Model and Streetlight
observed data for 2019. The analysis was completed by aggregating the TAZs to a system of districts. Figure 4 shows a map
displaying the reference numbers assigned to each district.
Figure 4 District Reference Map
Comparisons were made for each district to all other districts. Intra-district flows were intentionally removed and are shown as
blanks/zeros below. Table 4 presents the district-to-district flow differences between StreetLight to the model daily trip data.
The top 10 highest volume differences are highlighted in red, and a decrease in volume shown in parentheses implies a
negative difference. Table 5 reports the ranking of trip interchanges with the top 10 highest trip pairs highlighted in red. Figure
4 is used as a reference map for Tables 4 and 5.
Following are the specifications used in extracting information from StreetLight. This period was selected to be
consistent with the 2019 model scenario:
• Data Period: Apr 01, 2019 to May 31, 2019 and Sep 01, 2019 to Oct 31, 2019
• Day Type: Weekday (Mon. – Thur.)
• Day Part: All Day (12am to 12am)
134
May 8, 2024 Page 8 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10
2024 WRA.docx
Table 4 District to District Trip Volume Differences from 2019 Winchester Street Light to 2019 Model
Table 5 District to District Trip Volume Rankings from 2019 Winchester Street Light to 2019 Model
District to
District 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 (54) (98) 174 152 452 2,707 1,840 94 132 (363) 107 103 3 180 (1,333) 18 (676) (187)
2 (107) 95 377 34 448 5,851 5,171 (34) 49 (28) 157 45 18 (109) (255) 333 520 (735)
3 (215) 39 (74) 242 92 551 418 134 48 (25) 196 69 14 (369) (682) 562 (195) (881)
4 213 371 (82) 519 93 1,515 5,154 (237) 59 (85) 159 5 35 (599) 444 358 62 (86)
5 137 18 238 605 82 803 2,153 211 22 (27) 65 8 11 (295) 384 95 36 123
6 608 493 126 77 93 1,804 1,153 31 241 (595) 134 66 78 (367) (1,428) 20 (323) (142)
7 2,398 5,748 456 1,503 790 1,783 4,312 1,002 735 549 1,920 433 213 178 (184) 1,084 1,563 60
8 1,762 4,903 178 4,799 2,139 1,208 4,991 1,582 393 (34) 1,400 505 161 (1,189) (286) 804 (38) (494)
9 92 43 136 (53) 49 99 962 1,646 8 (342) 244 250 4 (841) 394 55 (225) 79
10 185 55 41 51 19 284 763 407 2 (275) 77 - 905 30 146 53 (45) 29
11 (274) 5 20 (50) (31) (469) 894 183 (380) (264) (493) (212) (621) (17) (31) (350) 3 58
12 158 152 175 122 62 156 1,880 1,441 164 84 (303) 49 333 86 202 (20) (56) 107
13 117 47 77 8 (23) 67 403 550 223 8 (155) 49 3 31 51 29 - 15
14 62 33 (21) 29 3 95 234 172 (25) 923 (615) 347 (2) (25) 73 11 (136) 369
15 232 (122) (404) (580) (360) 4 169 (1,104) (744) 40 (13) 96 35 (41) 10,527 255 (837) 206
16 (1,214) (255) (634) 440 455 (2,028) (378) (305) 334 140 (71) 202 56 75 11,140 65 136 (514)
17 36 332 569 339 93 30 963 816 1 54 (124) (21) 31 17 254 44 (10) -
18 (1,022) 896 (100) 185 82 (283) 1,597 (77) (204) (26) (60) 11 13 (88) (585) 189 (22) 50
19 (208) (743) (710) (125) 119 (103) (2) (568) 86 30 42 99 15 384 203 (481) (1) 46
District to
District 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 264 274 107 116 58 11 17 140 125 308 131 133 229 103 340 210 327 286
2 277 137 70 195 59 3 5 257 177 254 114 184 210 278 294 77 52 330
3 291 190 268 85 144 49 63 123 181 249 98 158 216 310 328 48 287 335
4 91 71 270 53 141 25 6 293 167 271 112 225 193 323 60 73 163 272
5 120 210 87 46 149 41 13 93 206 253 161 221 218 301 68 137 191 127
6 45 55 126 153 141 18 30 197 86 322 123 160 152 309 341 207 304 283
7 12 4 56 26 42 19 10 32 44 51 15 62 91 104 285 31 24 166
8 20 8 104 9 14 29 7 23 67 257 28 54 111 338 300 40 259 317
9 144 186 121 263 177 134 34 21 221 305 84 83 227 334 66 170 292 151
10 100 170 188 174 209 80 43 64 233 298 153 235 36 200 118 173 261 203
11 297 225 207 262 255 314 38 102 312 296 316 290 325 243 255 306 229 168
12 113 116 106 128 163 115 16 27 110 148 302 177 77 146 96 244 265 131
13 130 182 153 221 248 159 65 50 90 221 284 177 229 197 174 203 235 214
14 163 196 245 203 229 137 88 108 249 35 324 74 239 249 157 218 282 72
15 89 279 313 320 307 227 109 337 332 189 242 136 193 260 2 81 333 94
16 339 294 326 61 57 342 311 303 76 119 267 96 169 156 1 161 121 318
17 191 79 47 75 141 200 33 39 234 172 280 245 197 213 82 185 241 235
18 336 37 275 100 149 299 22 269 288 252 266 218 217 273 321 99 247 176
19 289 331 329 281 129 276 239 319 146 200 187 134 214 68 95 315 238 183
1 - 10 Highest Trip Pairs
135
May 8, 2024 Page 9 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
No Build Model Updates
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. 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.
Table 6 provides a summary of the zonal demographic inputs for 2019 and 2050.
Table 6: Zonal Demographic Totals (Source: MPO)
Variable 2019 2050
POP 119,846 167,159
HH 48,485 67,063
WORK 64,562 87,110
VEH 97,955 131,849
HTRET 7,152 9,487
IND 16,560 25,265
OFF 5,422 6,786
RET 6,062 8,151
SER 19,734 26,849
EMP 54,930 83,410
Socioeconomic data comparisons between 2019 and 2050 are shown in the figures below. The map in Figure 5
highlights the change in population by zone and Figure 6 displays the change in employment by zone. The color-
coded maps range from lighter to darker colors, exhibiting the least amount of change to the greatest, respectively.
136
May 8, 2024 Page 10 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 5 Change in Population between 2019 and 2050
137
May 8, 2024 Page 11 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 6 Change in Employment between 2019 and 2050
Demand Analysis
District-to-district trip volume growth is shown from the 2019 model to the forecasted 2050 model data results. Intra-
district flows were intentionally removed and shows as blanks/zeros. Table 7 shows the district-to-district volume
growth with the highest volume growth displayed in red, and Table 8 displays the rankings with the top 10 highest trip
pairs highlighted in red. A decrease in volume growth is shown in parentheses. Figure 4 is used as a reference map
for Tables 7 and 8.
138
May 8, 2024 Page 12 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10
2024 WRA.docx
Table 7 District to District Trip Volume Growth from 2022 to 2050
Table 8 District to District Trip Volume Growth Ranking from 2022 to 2050
District to
District 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 1,692 726 846 291 1,347 2,481 1,521 668 45 303 145 51 73 671 469 49 1,119 189
2 1,677 1,906 878 134 990 3,527 1,574 588 21 270 73 13 21 115 252 7 2,116 103
3 710 1,905 1,760 401 369 1,995 1,924 454 39 172 213 44 49 124 295 244 343 118
4 818 863 1,757 2,862 579 1,905 2,511 1,824 33 207 122 55 43 287 1,245 84 642 366
5 278 129 400 2,861 212 321 61 816 9 57 24 16 11 82 541 8 171 138
6 1,360 1,003 373 582 217 1,160 794 443 188 256 185 56 124 555 279 24 372 104
7 2,478 3,531 1,977 1,875 307 1,187 4,517 752 (102) 427 41 (90) (69) 863 1,785 (141) 2,426 632
8 1,561 1,570 1,920 2,500 56 810 4,455 339 (47) 276 (174) (69) (41) 515 1,545 (28) 1,322 534
9 683 568 444 1,823 816 450 754 346 43 153 286 197 71 139 739 19 297 181
10 45 21 38 31 9 189 (100) (45) 43 81 2 1 54 15 83 (11) 35 22
11 304 274 162 202 56 259 429 277 152 81 240 13 90 71 182 (9) 142 84
12 146 75 206 121 23 187 45 (175) 285 2 240 23 31 41 180 (19) 103 81
13 51 13 43 55 16 56 (90) (69) 197 1 13 23 2 5 26 (10) 17 7
14 73 21 49 41 11 125 (68) (39) 70 54 90 31 2 10 75 (10) 29 143
15 671 115 124 287 82 555 863 515 139 15 71 41 5 10 11,244 (93) 95 33
16 469 252 295 1,245 541 279 1,785 1,545 739 83 182 180 26 75 11,275 115 935 242
17 49 7 244 84 8 24 (141) (28) 19 (11) (9) (19) (10) (10) (93) 115 (3) -
18 1,119 2,116 343 642 171 372 2,426 1,322 297 35 142 103 18 29 96 934 (3) 47
19 189 103 118 366 138 104 632 534 181 22 84 81 7 143 34 242 - 47
District to
District 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 31 67 57 117 40 11 38 72 239 112 166 231 214 70 89 233 47 147
2 32 21 53 175 50 6 33 77 273 128 214 285 273 185 131 297 15 191
3 68 22 29 97 102 17 19 91 251 159 140 242 233 178 115 133 106 183
4 58 54 30 7 79 22 9 25 256 142 181 227 243 118 43 199 73 103
5 124 176 98 8 141 109 221 59 293 222 265 281 289 205 83 295 160 173
6 39 49 99 78 139 46 62 94 150 130 152 223 178 81 122 265 100 189
7 12 5 18 24 110 45 3 64 338 96 247 333 330 54 27 339 13 75
8 35 34 20 10 223 61 4 108 328 126 341 330 326 87 36 323 41 85
9 69 80 93 26 59 92 63 105 243 163 120 145 217 171 65 277 113 155
10 239 273 252 258 293 147 337 327 243 207 303 307 229 283 203 319 253 271
11 111 127 162 144 223 129 95 125 164 207 137 285 197 217 153 313 169 199
12 165 211 143 182 268 151 239 342 121 303 137 268 258 247 157 321 191 207
13 231 285 243 227 281 223 333 330 145 307 285 268 303 301 263 315 280 297
14 214 273 233 247 289 177 329 325 220 229 197 258 303 291 211 315 261 167
15 70 185 178 118 205 81 54 87 171 283 217 247 301 291 2 335 196 256
16 89 131 115 43 83 122 27 36 65 203 153 157 263 211 1 185 51 135
17 233 297 133 199 295 265 339 323 277 319 313 321 315 315 335 185 311 309
18 47 15 106 73 160 100 13 41 113 253 169 191 279 261 195 52 311 237
19 147 191 183 103 173 189 75 85 155 271 199 207 297 167 255 135 309 237
1 - 10 Highest Trip Pairs
139
May 8, 2024 Page 13 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
No Build Model Results
Overall growth in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) between 2019 and 2050 is 1.7% calculated 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 9
provides a summary of the VMT by facility type for the two model years.
Table 9: VMT by Facility Type
FACTYPE 2019 2050
Interstate 1.00 1,438,062.62 2,233,954.67
Minor Freeway 2.00 244,690.57 413,828.05
Pri Art 4.00 936,733.21 1,410,430.91
Maj Art 5.00 541,896.80 800,127.68
Min Art 6.00 697,129.38 1,133,993.47
Maj Col 7.00 130,599.83 197,643.67
Min Col 8.00 249,522.89 395,626.90
Ramp 10.00 91,349.15 122,719.23
CC 11.00 419,921.92 581,948.96
External 12.00 210,209.44 348,358.47
Total 4,960,115.81 7,638,632.01
Roadway link volume/capacity (v/c) ratios were examined to uncover any links with high vehicle volumes to capacity
in the study area. V/C ratios for the network links in both the 2019 and 2050 models were assessed at level-of-
service (LOS) D. To facilitate a comparison between 2019 and 2050, Figures 7 and 8 show color coded maps of v/c
ratios for several criteria ranges. The 2019 model reveals scattered areas where the v/c ratio indicates volumes that
exceed available capacity on minor and major arterials. In comparison, the 2050 model shows that the potential
roadway demand exceeds the available capacity for the majority of Interstate 81 and several major collectors within
the study area.
Additionally, Figures 9 and 10 show the daily model volumes along the roadways in the WinFred Regional Travel
Demand Model study area.
140
May 8, 2024 Page 14 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 7: 2019 Volume/Capacity Ratio
Figure 8: 2050 Volume/Capacity Ratio
141
May 8, 2024 Page 15 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 9: 2019 Daily Directional Volumes
Figure 10: 2050 Daily Directional Volumes
142
May 8, 2024 Page 16 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Model Forecasting
Two proposed build alternatives are presented for the year 2050: one at the southern end and the other at the
northern end of the study area. The volumes for both future year scenarios are compared to the 2050 no build
volumes. Additionally, both the no build and build scenarios were modified to include a diverging diamond
interchange (DDI) at I-81 Exit 317 and SR 11 Martinsburg Pike.
Southern Build Proposed Alternatives
The model assumptions for the 2050 southern build alternative are described in Table 10 and highlighted in Figure
11. Volume comparisons for this alternative to the no build model are shown in Figures 12 and 13. The change in
volume is displayed in Figure 14.
Table 10 Southern Build Alternative Assumptions
Southern Build Alternative Model Assumptions
SR 37 Bypass Divided facility with 2 lanes in each direction
Speed at 55pmh
Warrior Drive Ext
Undivided facility with 1 lane in each direction
At grade with SR 37 Bypass
Speed at 35mph
SR 522 Front Royal Pike At grade with SR 37 Bypass
Tasker Road At grade with SR 37 Bypass
Northern Build Proposed Alternatives
The model assumptions for the northern build alternative are described in Table 11 and highlighted in Figure 15.
Volume comparisons for this alternative to the no build model are shown in Figures 16 and 17. The change in
volumes is displayed in Figure 18.
Table 11 Northern Build Alternative Assumptions
Northern Build Alternative Model Assumptions
SR 37 Divided facility with 2 lanes in each direction
Speed at 55pmh
SR 7 Berryville Pike At grade with SR 37
Snowden Bridge Blvd At grade with SR 37
Wood Mill Rd At grade with SR 37
143
May 8, 2024 Page 17 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 11 Southern Build - Model Assumptions
144
May 8, 2024 Page 18 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 12 Southern No-Build - Volumes
Figure 13 Southern Build - Volumes
145
May 8, 2024 Page 19 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 14 Southern Build Volume Deltas - Build minus No Build
146
May 8, 2024 Page 20 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 15 Northern Build – Model Assumptions
147
May 8, 2024 Page 21 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 16 Northern No Build - Volumes
Figure 17 Northern Build - Volumes
148
May 8, 2024 Page 22 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 18 Northern Build Volume Deltas – Build minus No Build
149
May 8, 2024 Page 23 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT
DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Full 2050 Build
A full 2050 proposed build was completed that includes the entire SR 37 Bypass. For this scenario, the bypass was
modeled as a four lane, limited access highway.
V/C ratios for the network links in both the 2050 no build and 2050 build models were assessed at level-of-service
(LOS) D. To facilitate a comparison between 2050 no build and 2050 build, Figures 19 and 20 show color coded
maps of v/c ratios for several criteria ranges. The 2050 no build model shows that the potential roadway demand
exceeds the available capacity for the majority of Interstate 81 and several major collectors within the study area. In
comparison, with inclusion of the entire Route 37 bypass, the model shows a decrease in the v/c ratios for most of
the major collectors with roadway demand falling below the available capacity. However, the majority of Interstate 81
continues to show potential roadway demand exceeding available capacity.
Additionally, Figures 21 and 22 show the daily model volumes along the roadways in the WinFred Regional Travel
Demand Model study area for the 2050 no build and build models.
150
May 8, 2024 Page 24 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 19: 2050 Volume/Capacity Ratio - No Build
Figure 20: 2050 Volume/Capacity Ratio - Build
151
May 8, 2024 Page 25 Work Order Number 45792.000
\\vrserver\projects1\10590_VA_NSVRC_OnCall\01_Rt_37_East_Study\200_Disciplines\260_Planning\PLANNING REPORT DRAFT\Appendices\ECFTS - Model Application 05 10 2024 WRA.docx
Figure 21: 2050 Daily Directional Volumes – No Build
Figure 22: 2050 Daily Directional Volumes - Build
152
Time of Day: AM Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build Time of Day: AM Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)7,758 8,219 8,309 8,266
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)-6%-1%1%0%
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)1,761 1,115 1,052 1,053
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)67%6%0%0%
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)5,215 5,750 5,476 5,771
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)-10%0%-5%0%
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)3,099 3,161 3,227 3,212
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)-4%-2%0%0%
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)3,875 4,458 4,748 4,968
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)-22%-10%-4%0%
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)694 713 722 726
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)-4%-2%-1%0%
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)1,552 1,571 1,625 1,637
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)-5%-4%-1%0%
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)688 531 531 560
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)23%-5%-5%0%
Total VHT 24,642 25,518 25,690 26,193 Total VHT -6%-3%-2%0%
AM Change in VHT Compared to No Build
153
Time of Day: MD Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build Time of Day: MD Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)24,686 25,988 26,188 26,178
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)-6%-1%0%0%
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)4,703 2,985 2,817 2,798
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)68%7%1%0%
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)12,853 14,268 13,779 14,233
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)-10%0%-3%0%
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)8,468 8,758 8,728 8,648
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)-2%1%1%0%
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)10,189 11,469 12,307 12,666
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)-20%-9%-3%0%
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)1,798 1,823 1,847 1,863
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)-3%-2%-1%0%
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)4,046 4,155 4,206 4,319
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)-6%-4%-3%0%
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)1,698 1,337 1,319 1,366
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)24%-2%-3%0%
Total VHT 68,441 70,783 71,191 72,071 Total VHT -5%-2%-1%0%
MD Change in VHT Compared to No Build
154
Time of Day: PM Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build Time of Day: PM Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)6,496 6,907 7,119 7,132
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)-9%-3%0%0%
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)2,216 1,429 1,324 1,321
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)68%8%0%0%
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)6,083 6,675 6,550 6,705
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)-9%0%-2%0%
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)4,298 4,422 4,523 4,484
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)-4%-1%1%0%
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)5,094 5,734 6,214 6,438
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)-21%-11%-3%0%
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)804 813 822 829
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)-3%-2%-1%0%
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)1,904 1,980 2,005 2,034
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)-6%-3%-1%0%
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)951 784 788 809
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)18%-3%-3%0%
Total VHT 27,846 28,744 29,345 29,752 Total VHT -6%-3%-1%0%
PM Change in VHT Compared to No Build
155
Time of Day: NT Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build Time of Day: NT Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)9,147 9,577 9,565 9,584
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)-5%0%0%0%
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)2,150 1,312 1,295 1,276
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)68%3%1%0%
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)6,157 6,635 6,437 6,658
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)-8%0%-3%0%
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)3,701 3,781 3,661 3,635
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)2%4%1%0%
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)4,170 4,553 4,890 4,887
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)-15%-7%0%0%
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)3,931 4,338 4,619 4,732
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)-17%-8%-2%0%
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)1,731 1,742 1,745 1,769
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)-2%-2%-1%0%
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)762 690 657 701
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)9%-2%-6%0%
Total VHT 31,749 32,628 32,869 33,242 Total VHT -4%-2%-1%0%
NT Change in VHT Compared to No Build
156
Time of Day: Daily Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build Time of Day: Daily Full Bypass
Build
Southern
Section
Northern
Section No Build
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)48,087 50,691 51,181 51,160
FACTYPE 1
(Interstate)-6%-1%0%0%
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)10,830 6,841 6,488 6,448
FACTYPE 2
(Minor Freeway)68%6%1%0%
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)30,308 33,328 32,242 33,367
FACTYPE 4
(Principal Arterial)-9%0%-3%0%
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)19,566 20,122 20,139 19,979
FACTYPE 5
(Major Arterial)-2%1%1%0%
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)23,328 26,214 28,159 28,959
FACTYPE 6
(Minor Arterial)-19%-9%-3%0%
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)7,227 7,687 8,010 8,150
FACTYPE 7
(Major Collector)-11%-6%-2%0%
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)9,233 9,448 9,581 9,759
FACTYPE 8
(Minor Collector)-5%-3%-2%0%
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)4,099 3,342 3,295 3,436
FACTYPE 10
(Ramp)19%-3%-4%0%
Total VHT 152,678 157,673 159,095 161,258 Total VHT -5%-2%-1%0%
Daily Change in VHT Compared to No Build
157
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: October 28, 2024
Agenda Section: Capital Improvement Plan Update
Title: Capital Improvement Plan Update
Attachments:
TC10-28-24CapitalImprovementPlanUpdate.pdf
158
159
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: October 28, 2024
Agenda Section: County Project Updates
Title: County Project Updates
Attachments:
TC10-28-24CountyProjectUpdates.pdf
160
Item 5: County Project Updates
Renaissance Drive:
County contractor work has largely stopped on site as we await CSX installation of the crossing itself
which must be completed by their contractors per CSX requirements. The expected date has been pushed
back by CSX several times and is currently December. Upon completion of the crossing installation,
County contractors will be able to complete tie-ins and other ancillary work which should be able to be
completed within 90 days of CSX completing their work.
Gainesboro Road/Route 522 Intersection Project:
Planning Staff and School Division Staff met with our consultant to direct the merging of the school's
on-site needs to accommodate Gainesboro access with removal of any aspirational items and the road
improvements into a single plan set and cost estimate.
Route 37 (Eastern Frederick Transportation) Study:
Elsewhere on today's agenda
161
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: October 28, 2024
Agenda Section: Other
Title: Veterans Road (Route 625) Paving Request
Attachments:
162
Transportation Committee
Agenda Item Detail
Meeting Date: October 28, 2024
Agenda Section: Other
Title: December Meeting Cancellation
Attachments:
TC10-28-24Other.pdf
163
164