Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCAgenda2026June31.Call to Order 2.Invocation 3.Pledge of Allegiance 4.Adoption of Agenda – Pursuant to established procedures, the Planning Commission should adopt the Agenda for the meeting. 5.Meeting Minutes 5.A.March 18, 2026 Meeting Minutes 6.Committee Reports 7.Citizen Comments 8.Public Hearings 8.A.Rezoning #04-26 for Virginia Technology Park - (Mr. Bishop) Submitted to rezone +/- 220.06-acres from RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District to the TM (Technology-Manufacturing Park) Zoning District with proffers to develop Data Center uses. The property is located south of Rest Church Road, west of Zachary Ann Lane, and east of Ruebuck Lane, and is identified by Property Identification Numbers 33-A- 89, 33-A-90, and 33-9-1A in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 8.B.Rezoning #05-26 for Busy Beez (Clear Brook Rentals, LLC) - (Mr. Bittner) Submitted to rezone +/- 0.56-acres from B2 (General Business) Zoning District with proffers to B2 (General Business) Zoning District with revised proffers. The property is AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2026 7:00 PM THE BOARD ROOM FREDERICK COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA PC06-03-26MinutesMarch18.pdf PC06-03-26REZ04-26_Redacted.pdf PC06-03-26REZ04-26TrafficImpactAnalysis.pdf 1 located at 4489 Martinsburg Pike, Winchester, and is identified by Property Identification Number 33-A-93 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 8.C.Conditional Use Permit #02-26 for Lamar Rosenberry - (Mrs. Feltner) Submitted to utilize an existing detached garage for an Automotive Repair/Public Garage. The subject property is located at 730 Pack Horse Road, Winchester, and is identified with Property Identification Number 07-6-2 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. 8.D.Draft Update of the 2026-2027 Frederick County Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Improvement Plans - (Mr. Bishop) The Primary and Interstate Road Improvement Plans establish priorities for improvements to the Primary and Interstate Road networks within Frederick County. Comments from the Transportation Committee will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Ultimately, the priorities adopted by the Board of Supervisors will be forwarded to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for consideration. The Virginia Department of Transportation and the Planning Commission of Frederick County, in accordance with Section 33.2-331 of the Code of Virginia, will conduct a joint public hearing in the Board Room of the Frederick County Government Center, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 3, 2026. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public comments on the proposed Six Year Plan for Secondary Roads for Fiscal 2027 through 2032 Frederick County and on the Secondary System Construction budget for Fiscal Year 2027. Copies of the proposed Plan and Budget may be reviewed at the Edinburg Office of the Virginia Department of Transportation, located at 14031 Old Valley Pike, Edinburg, Virginia or at the Frederick County offices located at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. All projects in the Secondary Road Improvement Plan that are eligible for federal funds will be included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which documents how Virginia will obligate federal transportation funds. Any person requiring special assistance to attend and participate in this hearing should contact the Virginia Department of Transportation at 1-800-367-7623. Any person wishing to speak at this public hearing should contact the Frederick County Planning Department at 540-665-5651. 9.Other 9.A.Current Planning Applications 10.Adjourn PC06-03-26REZ05-26_Redacted.pdf PC06-03-26CUP02-26_Redacted.pdf PC06-03-26InterstatePrimarySecondaryRoadPlans.pdf 2 Planning Commission Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2026 Agenda Section: Meeting Minutes Title: March 18, 2026 Meeting Minutes Attachments: PC06-03-26MinutesMarch18.pdf 3 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4255 Minutes of March 18, 2026 MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia on March 18, 2026. PRESENT: Tim Stowe, Chairman/Red Bud District; Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman/Shawnee District; Elizabeth D. Kozel, Shawnee District; Kevin Sneddon, Opequon District; Thomas Bottorf, Opequon District; Justin Kerns, Stonewall District; Charles S. DeHaven III, Stonewall District; Betsy Brumback, Back Creek District; Jeff McKay, Back Creek District; Vaughn Whitacre, Gainesboro District; Joseph M. Crane, Gainesboro District; John J. Lamanna, Member at Large. ABSENT: Charles Markert, Red Bud District. STAFF PRESENT: Wyatt G. Pearson, Director; Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator; Eric Bittner, Planner II; Andrew R. Fox, County Attorney. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Stowe called the March 18, 2026 meeting of the Frederick County Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Pastor John Van Drunen from Fellowship Bible Church delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Thomas led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Upon a motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kozel the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the agenda for this evening’s meeting. Minutes Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Kozel, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the minutes from the January 7, 2026 and January 21, 2026 meetings. ------------- 4 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4256 Minutes of March 18, 2026 COMMITTEES Historic Resources Advisory Board – 02/20/26 Commissioner Kerns reported, the Board introduced new members and held elections for the Chairman and Vice Chairman. Discussed at the meeting was CUP for Winchester Gateway to develop a data center campus. He concluded, presented was historic restoration grant review: Application for Heater House Restoration and Application for St. Thomas Chapel Restoration. Frederick Water – 03/17/26 Commissioner Bottorf reported the Board started the budget process and continue to work on the Strategic Plan. City of Winchester – 03/17/26 Commissioner Bloom, City of Winchester Liaison, reported the Commission reviewed when appropriate to hold work sessions. The Commission recommended approval of a text amendment to the zoning ordinance for short term rentals and recommended approval of a PUD for 43 townhomes. Transportation Committee – 02/23/26 Chairman Stowe reported the most notable item at the meeting was the exit 317 (Route 7) bridge will be worked on over the summer months which will drastically effect traffic in that area. Board of Supervisors – 03/11/26 Supervisor Orndorff, Board of Supervisor Liaison, reported the Board approved REZ #01- 26 for 700 Ross Street and directed Staff to conduct a separation buffer study. ------------- CITIZEN COMMENTS Chairman Stowe called for citizen comments on any subject not currently on the Planning Commission’s agenda or any item that is solely a discussion item for the Commission. No one came forward to speak and Chairman Stowe closed the public comments portion of the meeting. ------------- 5 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4257 Minutes of March 18, 2026 PUBLIC HEARING Rezoning #02-26 of Plasters HVAC Action – Recommend Approval Eric Bittner, Planner II, reported this is a proposal to rezone 1.21+/- acres from B2 (General Business) Zoning District with proffers to B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District with proffers. The property is located at 161 Commonwealth Court, Winchester, and in the Back Creek Magisterial District. He noted, the property was previously rezoned (REZ #09-16) from B3 to B2. Mr. Bittner shared a location map of the property. He stated, if approved, it will create a non-conformance as the property currently exceeds the 25% open space requirement in the B3 district; the Applicant has proffered mediation. He presented a zoning map and a long range land use map of the property and surrounding area. Mr. Bittner presented revisions to the Proffer Statement dated January 23, 2026: A. Land Use Restriction • Gasoline station with/without convenience stores excluding fuel dealers • Movie theaters, including drive-in theater • Parks • Owner will comply with §165-601.02 Industrial Transition District Minimum Landscape Area (percentage of lot area). Submitted with a site plan and performed prior to the issuance of a Change of Use Permit. B. Proffer Payments • $0.10 per square foot for any new building square footage for County Fire and Rescue services. Contribution is to be paid at the time of Change of Use Permit. Mr. Bittner noted the proposed rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and advances the Kernstown Area Plan of business. Proffer A.1 removes uses that would not advance the Comprehensive Plan. He presented the Generalized Development Plan for the project. Commissioner Thomas asked about an area on the GDP that is currently paved; he stated it seems unnecessary to have to remove it. Mr. Bittner explained, the purpose is the B3 district has open space and landscape areas mainly dealing with stormwater and erosion control, which is more intense than the B2 district which requires 15% requirement. In order to meet the 25%, the space needs to be removed. Commissioner Thomas stated the Applicant is not increasing the drainage or anything else on the site, so this does not make sense to him. Wyatt G. Pearson, Director, commented the open space standards are different between the two zoning districts so it needs to be brought to the B3 standards for this rezoning. Commissioner Thomas commented to possibly look at the zoning ordinance. Mr. Pearson stated Staff can take a look at the zoning ordinance and propose an amendment if needed. Marissa Whitacre of Greenway Engineering and representing the Applicant stated this rezoning is needed for the change of use. Chairman Stowe called for anyone who wished to speak regarding the Public Hearing to come forward. No one came forward and the Public Hearing was closed for the public comment portion. Upon motion made by Commissioner McKay and seconded by Commissioner Brumback BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does unanimously recommend approval of Rezoning #02-26 of Plasters HVAC. 6 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4258 Minutes of March 18, 2026 Revocation of Conditional Use Permit #03-24 for 172 Fire House LLC and Barbara Singhas Action – Recommend Approval Mark R. Cheran, Zoning & Subdivision Administrator, reported this Conditional Use Permit is proposed to be revoked due to a violation of Condition #4 from Conditional Use Permit #03-24 which pertains to a minor site plan. The property is located at 171 Old Firehouse Lane, Winchester VA, and is identified with Property Identification Number 52-A-287B in the Back Creek Magisterial District. He shared a location map of the property. Mr. Cheran presented a site history of the CUP: The property owner was cited on June 15, 2023, for operation of a landscaping business and stowage of tractor trailers on site (A Cut Above Landscaping); The property owner applied for a Conditional Use Permit after Frederick County filed a criminal complaint that was heard in General District Court on July 12, 2023; The property owner applied for a CUP on July 13, 2023 and the Board of Supervisors approved CUP #03-24 on August 14, 2024 with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. Hours of operation for the site shall be limited to 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM daily with the exception for emergency inclement weather services (snow removal and storm damage remediation) and customer visits shall be limited to 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM daily. 3. No more than 60 employees on the property at any time. 4. A minor site plan shall be approved by Frederick County, and the improvements shown on the site plan be completed prior to the establishment of this use. 5. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Cheran reported the business has been operating for two years in violation of Condition #4. A minor site p lan has not been approved by Frederick County for this use. The owner applied for and submitted a minor site plan on July 21, 2025, for Staff to review. Staff reviewed the site plan on July 29, 2025, and could not grant approval of the plan. The owner has not addressed the outstanding issues to allow Staff to approve the plan. Mr. Cheran shared Frederick County Code 165-103.03 Revocation: A. Failure to establish or discontinuance of the approved conditional use. If the approved conditional use has not been established within two years of approval or it has been discontinued for two years, the conditional use permit may be revoked. B. Repeated or continuing violations of this chapter, including violations of the conditions placed on the permit. C. Fraudulent, false or misleading information supplied by the applicant for the conditional use. Mr. Cheran concluded this business has been operating without an approved site plan since 2024, in violation of the Condition #4 and Staff is seeking action of this revocation of CUP #03-24. Commissioner Sneddon asked is the site was initially truck parking then transitioned to the landscape business. Mr. Cheran commented it was a combination of both. Commissioner Thomas asked if the Commission recommends this CUP be revoked, when it goes to the Board of Supervisors on April 8th; does the Board have the opportunity to table if a site plan has yet to be submitted. Mr. Cheran stated that is correct and it up to the Board to make that decision. Commissioner Sneddon asked is the Applicant has held a business license before. Mr. Cheran commented yes and that was at a different location, not this site. Commissioner DeHaven asked if the site plan being submitted required some improvements. Mr. Cheran noted the site plan submitted had about six comments that were not addressed by the applicant or applied to the site plan. 7 Frederick County Planning Commission Page 4259 Minutes of March 18, 2026 Steve Pettler, of Harrison and Johnston, representing the Applicant came forward and shared the history of this application and the steps that have been taken to mitigate the challenges presented. He requested this revocation be tabled for 30 days. Commissioners shared their concerns with a business license not being established for this address and the complaints against the property have not been addressed by the Applicant. Chairman Stowe called for anyone who wished to speak regarding the Public Hearing to come forward. Rocky Keplinger, Larry Ludwig, and Leslie Spencer spoke against this business being in operation due to the negligence in the past with the property. A representative of the Independent School of Winchester spoke in favor of this business and stated they have been a good neighbor to the school. No one else came forward and the Public Hearing was closed for the public comment portion. Commissioners discussed the options of the application being tabled and the timeline for the site plan process. Mr. Cheran stated most review agencies have already commented on this. Upon motion made by Commissioner Brumback and seconded by Commissioner McKay to table for 30 days with site plan being submitted; the motion failed. Yes: Whitacre, DeHaven, Brumback, McKay, Sneddon No: Crane, Kerns, Kozel, Thomas, Bottorf, Lamanna, Stoe Absent: Markert Upon motion made by Commissioner Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Crane to revoke the Conditional Use Permit Yes: Lamanna, Stowe, Bottorf, Thomas, Kozel, Kerns, DeHaven, Crane, Whitacre No: Brumback, McKay, Sneddon Absent: Markert BE IT RESOLVED, the Frederick County Planning Commission does recommend Revocation of Conditional Use Permit #03-24 for 172 Fire House LLC and Barbara Singhas. ------------- ADJOURNMENT No further business remained to be discussed, and a motion was made by Commissioner Thomas to adjourn the meeting. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kozel and unanimously passed. The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, _________________________ Tim Stowe, Chairman _________________________ Wyatt G. Pearson, Secretary 8 Planning Commission Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2026 Agenda Section: Public Hearings Title: Rezoning #04-26 for Virginia Technology Park - (Mr. Bishop) Attachments: PC06-03-26REZ04-26_Redacted.pdf PC06-03-26REZ04-26TrafficImpactAnalysis.pdf 9 REZONING #04-26 Virginia Technology Park Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: May 26, 2026 Staff Contact: John A Bishop, AICP, Assistant Planning Director Executive Summary: Meeting Schedule Planning Commission: May 5, 2026 Planning Commission: June 3, 2026 Action: Work Session; no action Action: Pending (Public Hearing) Board of Supervisors: July 8, 2026 (TBD) Action: Pending (Public Hearing) Property Information Property Identification Number (PIN) 33-A-89; 33-A-90; 33-9-1A Address 1420 Rest Church Road, Clearbrook Magisterial District Stonewall Acreage +/- 220.06 Zoning & Present Land Use Zoning: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Agricultural Proposed Zoning TM (Technology Manufacturing District) Adjoining Property Zoning & Present Land Use North: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Agricultural South: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential, Vacant (Future Substation) East: B3 (Industrial Transition)/M1 (Light Industrial) Districts Land Use: Industrial (Flying J and Caterpillar) West: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential Proposed Use This is a request to rezone three (3) parcels totaling approximately +/-220.06-acres from the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District to the TM (Technology Manufacturing Park) Zoning District with proffers for development of a data center campus. Positives Concerns The rezoning proposes a zoning district, TM, which may be associated with the Plan identified land uses in the Comprehensive Plan for the “Mixed Use Industrial/Office” designation. The proposed rezoning may not fully meet the Northeast Land Use Plan’s statement that “Uses which significantly contribute to air, noise, and light pollution as well as businesses that create large volumes of truck 10 Page 2 of 10 The Northeast Land Use Plan (NELUP, 2023) makes multiple references to traffic concerns and potentially high traffic uses. With some exceptions covered in the concerns portion of this report, the proposed data center use would allow for the development of an Economic Development Authority (EDA) targeted industry while having a relatively low long-term impact on the transportation system. The property’s proximity to the existing overhead electric transmission line as well as the future substation (NextEra) addresses potential questions of where power may come from for the proposed data center use, thus eliminating the need for the proffered allowance for power generating facilities. The proffer of Tier IV (or equivalent) generators classified for emergency use. The GDP provides buffer area in the vicinity of residentially developed properties. The application accommodates the future planned north/south collector roadway identified in the Comprehensive Plan. traffic are discouraged in these areas.” Without adequate mitigation that may not currently be fully accommodated within the proffer statement, particularly regarding sound. While the applicant has taken steps in the proffers to buffer residential properties to the south and west with earthen berms and landscaping, it’s important to recognize this area is a transition area between comprehensive planned “Mixed Use Industrial/Office” and the rural western portion of the County. This will be potentially the first of the commercial/industrial properties in this important zone along the west side of I-81 to develop and as such has the opportunity to set the standard for how the transition between rural and commercial/industrial will look and impact rural neighbors. Flex Tech should be added to the list of excluded uses due to the ability to place M1 uses within it. The focus of this rezoning and its proffers upon data centers as a use has potential to create a situation where impacts of those potential M1 uses could be overlooked. Berms, while proffered and a positive development for this application, need more location specifics to evaluate the benefits. Design guidelines remain a concern as noted in more detail in the proffer section below. Staff would note the applicant has dedicated significant language to this topic in the proffer document, but concerns remain regarding the actual impact of this language and enforceability as depicted. The applicant has continued to study and make strides toward mitigating sound impacts. However, a comparison of the applicant’s scenarios in their updated study with their ambient noise study still represents 11 Page 3 of 10 a significant impact of additional sound to neighboring residential properties. Additionally, due to the receipt date of the updated sound study, the County’s 3rd party sound consultant has not yet been able to complete their analysis of the report as of the date of this staff report. Staff expects to have that feedback prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The application and proffers note significant water needs and have now proffered a cap of 120,000 gallons per day but provide little detail on the provision of upgrades to the system required to accommodate those needs in order to provide that volume of water and sewer service to this property. Review Agency Comments: See attached applicant referral agency comment response letter. Planning & Zoning Staff Analysis: Introduction: Please note that the information in this staff report is based upon materials an analysis received as of 5/26/26. The full packet from the applicant includes applicant responses to the 5/5/26 Planning Commission Work Session feedback that was provided to them and the applicant has updated their proffers and application materials where they have seen fit. This staff report does not analyze the progression of the various proffers that have changed but offers a summary of the application as it currently stands. Site History: The subject properties were first identified for potential commercial/industrial uses in the Comprehensive Plan in 2008, this property has remained undeveloped with the most recent attempt to rezone (Fruit Hill REZ #10-22) being denied by the Board of Supervisors. Comprehensive Plan Conformance: The Comprehensive Plan (adopted November 2021) and more specifically the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan (NELUP, 2023) located in Appendix I of the Comprehensive Plan provide guidance on the future development of the subject property. The Plan identifies the subject properties with a "Mixed Use Industrial/Office" land use designation and as being within the limits of the Sewer and Water Service Area (SWSA). The plan further states the following regarding the Mixed-Use Industrial/Office Land Use: "The NELUP identifies a number of areas designated as future mixed use industrial office. These areas are intended to develop with targeted growth sectors identified by the 12 Page 4 of 10 County's Economic Development Authority (EDA), as well as similar industries that are likely to bring higher wages, professional and/or technology jobs.” “Uses which significantly contribute to air, noise, and light pollution as well as businesses that create large volumes of truck traffic are discouraged in these areas. Consideration of uses outside the identified targeted businesses should only be considered if they are secondary and complementary to these targeted businesses.” “It should be noted that areas North of Hopewell Road and Exit 321 to the West Virginia line are within reasonable proximity of significant electrical transmission capability. In tum, these areas may be well suited for energy intensive development if the other necessary utilities could be provided to sites and the development provides benefit to Frederick County." Staff would highlight that while the potential data center use is an EDA targeted industry as noted in the uses for NELUP and is also located near significant electrical transmission capability, that significant care will need to be taken to address other elements of the Comprehensive Plan directives regarding the need for other necessary utilities to be provided. The following statements from the NELUP are also important: "As these areas are highly visible, building and site design should be of a high quality to ensure that these areas put forth an attractive view for both residents and visitors; enhanced buffers and screening are also important along Interstate 81 and adjoining roadways. " "Existing residential uses are located along Martinsburg Pike, in close proximity to areas planned for more intensive uses. While many of these residential uses are planned to transition in the future to higher intensity uses, development applications should seek to mitigate their impact on these residences near term." The paragraph above, while targeted at the Martinsburg Pike corridor, is equally applicable to the applicant's property. As noted in the Defined Rural Areas section of the NELUP, this property, located at the edge of the SWSA, with its land use designation of Mixed Use Industrial/Office acts as the boundary of the comprehensive planned more intensive development in this portion of the County. As such, and due to nearby residential neighbors, particular care should be taken regarding the buffering and impacts of sightlines, air quality, light, and noise. Transportation & Site Access: As noted within NELUP, the transportation network in this area is strained and the current proposal of a potential data center would be a relatively low generator for traffic once constructed. The applicant has proffered additional traffic study and remediation if they were to implement uses that generate traffic in excess of what has been studied for the data center. Additionally, there is a north/south collector road in the comprehensive plan which the applicant is proffering to accommodate. Proffer Statement, Generalized Development Plan (GDP), & Impact Analysis: 13 Page 5 of 10 Proffers (Revision Date 5/19/2026) Staff Comment Proffer 1 – Development and Use of the Property Updated proffers have removed all uses with the exception of “Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, and Data Centers” and “Flex Tech” from the list of permitted uses allowed under the zoning ordinance and continue to allow accessory uses that are reasonably assumed to be in support of a data center use while specifically not allowing power generation. Since Flex Tech allows all M1 uses, staff would recommend its exclusion as well. Proffer 2 – Building and Site Design C. Tier IV generators are proffered for emergency use. The proffer notes that the generators “shall be permitted to be emergency generation units...” Staff would recommend the insertion of the word “only” after units. D. Generator Operations The proffer has been updated to note that sound will be limited to 60 dBA where the property abuts residential properties. Staff would note that while that is a positive improvement and significantly lower than the 70 dBA that would be allowed by the ordinance under the proposed zoning classification, this still represents a significant increase in sound levels based upon the applicant’s Ambient Noise Analysis. E. Emergency operations The applicant has deleted former section E from the proffers. Staff does not see an issue there as Emergency operations are defined at the State level, however, the staff comment still stands regarding information on 14 Page 6 of 10 frequency and duration of emergency scenarios in Virginia. F. (Note: this is now section E in the current proffer document) Noise mitigation measures for cooling equipment. Given the rapidly advancing technology for equipment in this industry, a proffered equipment monitoring and upgrade to modern standard schedule may be appropriate. Applicant has proffered $10,000 for the purchase of a digital sound level meter. Staff would recommend making this language more general as at time of staff report the department has not determined specific costs for this equipment at this time. A brief search indicates equipment could cost less than the proffered amount which, based upon proffer language, would potentially render remaining proffer funds unusable. G (Now F). Building Design. A number of facade elements are included in the proffers, which note “some” of them shall be included. However, the examples listed have varying levels of impact and commitment. Staff would suggest this section could be more robust and include more specific and enforceable examples in order to provide greater certainty to decision makers and neighboring residents. A discussion of building heights or even varying building heights dependent on proximity to residential units may be appropriate. Staff remains concerned with the enforceability of the proffered design language and the potentially low bar set by use of the word ‘some’ relative to the long list of design elements. Staff would further emphasize the communications shared with the applicant regarding the development of a 15 Page 7 of 10 campus like atmosphere and the need for any proposed park to be ‘high quality’ in terms of visual amenities and appeal both from the neighboring properties and potentially I-81. Staff would consider the new proffer “I” for the creation of design standards as a general positive improvement but note that there appears to be relatively little authority granted via proffer to approve or deny this standards document. Staff would also note that varying building heights does not appear to have been considered as of yet. Proffer 3 – Transportation No comments at this time Proffer 4 – Signage No comments at this time Proffer 5 – Lighting No comments at this time Proffer 6 – Fire and Rescue No comments at this time Proffer 7 – Water and Sewer The applicant has proffered to not utilize groundwater resources via private on site wells for any reason (Proffer 7-G), a limitation of 120,000 gallons per day of water maximum (Proffer 7-B), clarified handling processes of potential discharges (Proffer 7- F), and the installation of monitoring wells both on the property and on neighboring properties (if permission granted) for monitoring of groundwater levels during construction activities (G and H). While potentially not a proffer more information is needed on specific upgrades to the public water and sewer system to accommodate the proposed water usage of the facility and how those upgrades will be achieved to ensure unforeseen impacts are not had on other property owners. For example, will all upgrades be contained within existing Frederick Water easements and the applicant’s 16 Page 8 of 10 property or will new or expanded easements be acquired from other property owners? Proffer 8 – Cultural Resources Investigation and Preservation No comments at this time Proffer 9 – Support for Educational Programming and Scholarships at Laurel Ridge Community College No comments at this time Proffer 10 – CPI Escalator No comments at this time Generalized Development Plan The generalized development plan (GDP), dated 3/3/2026, is included in the public hearing staff report packet and details organization, physical features, and buffering. Planning Commission Summary from 5/5/2026 Work Session The Planning Commission held a work session at 6 P.M. on May 5, 2026, to discuss the proposed rezoning application with staff and the applicant representatives. Numerous issues were discussed among the Commissioners for the applicant to address prior to the public hearing: 1. Water a. No Use of groundwater. 17 Page 9 of 10 b. More information on removal of glycol from the water. How and where it's treated with the key focus on how contaminants are not being introduced into our groundwater. c. Concerns about overall volume of water. d. Potentially proffering a closed loop only system was contemplated, or proffering out systems that use significant water. e. More information is desired on the extent to which the offsite system for Frederick Water needs to be upgraded and how those upgrades take place, including where and if additional easements are needed. f. Potential for on-site water treatment (related to b.) (3rd party treatment and removal was also mentioned) g. Monitoring wells during construction 2. Noise a. Concerns over expected noise levels and also a comparison to how much noise a residential property is allowed were brought up. Near the end of the meeting one planning commissioner even seemed to say any noise increase for neighbors is a concern. b. Updating of noise study to reflect use of Tier IV if that is being proffered. I would also note the proffer would need to include NOT requesting non-emergency use as part of DEQ permit. Permit must be for emergency use only. c. I'm also not sure if the previous study considered the berms. I'm not sure if this is something that needs to be considered. d. Also, regarding new study, we definitely need that as soon as reasonably possible for vetting by the County's sound consultant. e. Concerns regarding low frequencies were raised as well as their potential impacts. f. "The sound study only registered frequencies down to 63hz for some reason. People can hear down to 20hz, and as we all know, it is the lowest frequencies on the scale that have garnered the most concerns with the public. Would you be able to ask that they add measurements down to 20hz and any additional information or explanation as to what those measurements mean in context to this project?" g. This is my comment, but in general I would restate the obvious in that the Planning Commission is extremely concerned about noise and looking for further study and more mitigation measures than are currently or have been currently evaluated within the sound study. h. There were discussions of strategies for noise management during generator cycling. i. More information on generator containment structures may be needed and whether they are the maximum or whether there can be even greater noise reduction/control j. Proffering of noise monitoring and reporting (Note there is an ordinance requirement that applies here but I don't think it speaks to ongoing monitoring and reporting on as frequent a basis as I feel was communicated last night) https://ecode360.com/46233642 k. C-weighted charting for noise study was brought up. 3. Air Quality a. Tier IV generators b. Potential use of Natural Gas or propane instead of diesel to power generators 4. Traffic a. Concern was raised about the 1% growth rate used in the TIA. A PC member was seeking greater justification of that. Or use of the County's estimated growth. b. The potential of proffering out additional higher traffic uses was raised as well. Staff mentioned that trip caps may be the answer or part of the answer. Staff had noted in our 18 Page 10 of 10 report that the new TIA and implementation of recommended improvements proffers could be tighter to remove potential future conflicts. Perhaps a combination of these items is the answer. c. Construction work week and hours was raised as a concern needing greater information and potential proffer controls. 5. Other a. There is significant concern over this proposed data center potentially becoming occupied by an organization with some level of tax exemption. While there was a good amount of discussion, it would appear that additional investigation/discussion is needed and hopefully there are strategies that could be legally applied to provide more surety here. To be extremely clear, neither Planning Commission nor staff would seek a solution that is not fully compliant with all state and federal laws. b. Architecture i. Much more surety and enforceability is desired for architectural standards ii. More information on visual impacts and viewshed analysis and sample graphics and I also have received a request that when the visuals are created that focus on residential that the same be done for the view from I-81 in which visual renderings are provided. This was brought by a PC member but as noted in the staff report the NELUP does discuss this area as an important visual gateway for the County and this has also been raised by some citizens. iii. Building design standards in general. LEED certification was mentioned. iv. Consistency of design and architecture across the development was noted as a concern. If I can try and characterize, I think they are not so much looking for strict uniformity where all buildings look just the same so much as a development that would look to the maximum extent possible harmonious and high quality in general. Perhaps upscale would be the right descriptive word as well. v. Building heights were raised as a concern and this ties into ii above. One planning commissioner noted designs where chillers were inside as a possibility. Another mentioned single story and a 3rd even mentioned an underground scenario or component. c. More information on phasing of the development overall, particularly how and when screening amenities go in d. Batteries and energy storage e. I believe more information and detail is sought on potential job creation. Adjusting the FI model to account for remote/workers who live outside the County. i. Total jobs ii. Salaries iii. Local or remote workers iv. Shifts No action was taken by the Planning Commission at the work session. Following a public hearing, staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors on this rezoning application. 19 £¤11 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 RESTCHURCH R D WOODBI N E RD JONATH A N D R MARTINSBURGPIKESTAYMANDRTIMBERLAKES LNREST CHURCH R D JOLINE D R HAUPTMAN CT RUEBUCK RDRUEBUCK LN REST CHURC H R D ZACHARY ANN LNMACBE T H L N MARTINSBURGPIKE33 A 89 33 A 90 33 A 90 33 A 90 33 9 1A 1073 REST CHURCH RD 1099 REST CHURCH RD 1171 REST CHURCH RD 976 REST CHURCH RD 988 REST CHURCH RD 1004 REST CHURCH RD 1018 REST CHURCH RD 1090 REST CHURCH RD 1102 REST CHURCH RD 1226 REST CHURCH RD 1299 REST CHURCH RD 1120 REST CHURCH RD 1130 REST CHURCH RD 130 RUEBUCK LN 172 RUEBUCK LN 224 RUEBUCK LN 280 RUEBUCK LN 291 MACBETH LN 309 MACBETH LN 337 MACBETH LN 361 MACBETH LN 1309 REST CHURCH RD 1221 REST CHURCH RD 173 RUEBUCK RD 191 RUEBUCK RD 211 RUEBUCK RD374 ORCHARD DALE DR 155 JONATHAN DR 120 JOLINE DR 170 JOLINE DR 4552 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4622 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4294 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4532 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1065 REST CHURCH RD 4491 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4481 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4273 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4317 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4230 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4231 MARTINSBURG PIKE 279 ZACHARY ANN LN 321 ZACHARY ANN LN 351 ZACHARY ANN LN 344 ORCHARD DALE DR 241 STAYMAN DR 200 STAYMAN DR 201 JONATHAN DR 163 JONATHAN DR 196 RUEBUCK RD 1287 REST CHURCH RD 1287 REST CHURCH RD 114 RUEBUCK RD 160 RUEBUCK RD 180 RUEBUCK RD 286 JOLINE DR 320 JOLINE DR 352 JOLINE DR 378 JOLINE DR 343 JOLINE DR 4663 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4374 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4514 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4442 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4462 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1109 REST CHURCH RD 1145 REST CHURCH RD 162 ROME DR 946 REST CHURCH RD 964 REST CHURCH RD 1034 REST CHURCH RD 1046 REST CHURCH RD 1062 REST CHURCH RD 1076 REST CHURCH RD 1333 REST CHURCH RD 332 THISTLE LN 1146 REST CHURCH RD 1160 REST CHURCH RD 1176 REST CHURCH RD 1188 REST CHURCH RD 160 MACBETH LN 160 MACBETH LN 191 MACBETH LN 191 MACBETH LN 209 MACBETH LN 253 MACBETH LN 266 MACBETH LN 367 MACBETH LN 371 MACBETH LN 1345 REST CHURCH RD 135 RUEBUCK RD 147 RUEBUCK RD 221 RUEBUCK RD 185 STAYMAN DR 159 STAYMAN DR 151 STAYMAN DR 306 ORCHARD DALE DR 210 JOLINE DR 4586 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4600 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4312 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4322 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1029 REST CHURCH RD 4455 MARTINSBURG PIKE4441 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4407 MARTINSBURG PIKE 259 WINESAP CT 223 WINESAP CT 197 WINESAP CT 4268 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4170 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4123 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1530 REST CHURCH RD 240 STAYMAN DR 180 JONATHAN DR338 ORCHARD DALE DR 260 JOLINE DR 382 JOLINE DR 381 JOLINE DR375 JOLINE DR 367 JOLINE DR 215 JOLINE DR 201 JOLINE DR 193 JOLINE DR 4547 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4342 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4392 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4412 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4504 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4428 MARTINSBURG PIKE 529 TIMBERLAKES LN 124 HAUPTMAN CT 141 HAUPTMAN CT 163 HAUPTMAN CT 209 HAUPTMAN CT µ Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: April 30, 2026 £¤11§¨¦81 §¨¦81 TIMBERLAKESLNREST CHURCH R DELFWAY CEDAR HILL R D WINE S A P CT ORCHARDDALE DRWO O D B I N E RDROMEDRSTAYMANDR HAUPTMAN CT RUEBUCK LNMARTINSBURG PIKEWOODSIDE RDROCKY LN BUSINESS BLVD BRANS O N SPRIN G R D THISTLE LN JOLINE DR RUEBUCKRDBROWNLNMACBE T H L N 0 975 1,950487.5 Feet BERKELEY COUNTY WV REZ # 04 - 26: Virginia Technology Park PINs: 33 - A - 89, 33 - A - 90, 33 - 9 - 1A Rezoning from RA to TM with Proffers Location Map Application Sewer and Water Service Area Parcels REZ #04-26 REZ #04-26 REZ #04-26 20 £¤11 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 RESTCHURCH R D WOODBI N E R D JONATH A N D R MARTINSBURGPIKESTAYMANDRTIMBERLAKES LNREST CHURCH R D JOLINE D R HAUPTMAN CT RUEBUCK RDRUEBUCK LN REST CHURC H R D ZACHARY ANN LNMACBE T H L N MARTINSBURGPIKE33 A 89 33 A 90 33 A 90 33 A 90 33 9 1A 1029 REST CHURCH RD 1035 REST CHURCH RD 1109 REST CHURCH RD 1145 REST CHURCH RD 162 ROME DR 946 REST CHURCH RD 964 REST CHURCH RD 1034 REST CHURCH RD 1046 REST CHURCH RD 1062 REST CHURCH RD 1076 REST CHURCH RD 1333 REST CHURCH RD 332 THISTLE LN 1146 REST CHURCH RD 1160 REST CHURCH RD 1176 REST CHURCH RD 1188 REST CHURCH RD 160 MACBETH LN 160 MACBETH LN 4469 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4455 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4441 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4407 MARTINSBURG PIKE 259 WINESAP CT 223 WINESAP CT 197 WINESAP CT 4268 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4170 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4123 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1530 REST CHURCH RD 240 STAYMAN DR 180 JONATHAN DR338 ORCHARD DALE DR 185 STAYMAN DR 159 STAYMAN DR 151 STAYMAN DR 306 ORCHARD DALE DR 4342 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4392 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4412 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4504 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4428 MARTINSBURG PIKE 529 TIMBERLAKES LN 124 HAUPTMAN CT 141 HAUPTMAN CT 163 HAUPTMAN CT 209 HAUPTMAN CT 191 MACBETH LN 191 MACBETH LN 209 MACBETH LN 253 MACBETH LN 266 MACBETH LN 367 MACBETH LN 371 MACBETH LN 1345 REST CHURCH RD 135 RUEBUCK RD 147 RUEBUCK RD 221 RUEBUCK RD 210 JOLINE DR 260 JOLINE DR 382 JOLINE DR 381 JOLINE DR375 JOLINE DR 367 JOLINE DR 215 JOLINE DR 201 JOLINE DR 193 JOLINE DR 4547 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4600 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4312 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4322 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1073 REST CHURCH RD 1089 REST CHURCH RD 1171 REST CHURCH RD 976 REST CHURCH RD 988 REST CHURCH RD 1004 REST CHURCH RD 1018 REST CHURCH RD 1090 REST CHURCH RD 1102 REST CHURCH RD 1226 REST CHURCH RD 1299 REST CHURCH RD 1120 REST CHURCH RD 1130 REST CHURCH RD 130 RUEBUCK LN 172 RUEBUCK LN 224 RUEBUCK LN 280 RUEBUCK LN 4491 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4481 MARTINSBURG PIKE 147 WINESAP CT374 ORCHARD DALE DR 4273 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4317 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4230 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4231 MARTINSBURG PIKE 279 ZACHARY ANN LN 321 ZACHARY ANN LN 351 ZACHARY ANN LN 344 ORCHARD DALE DR 241 STAYMAN DR 200 STAYMAN DR 201 JONATHAN DR 163 JONATHAN DR 155 JONATHAN DR 196 RUEBUCK RD 1287 REST CHURCH RD1287 REST CHURCH RD 114 RUEBUCK RD 160 RUEBUCK RD 180 RUEBUCK RD 4374 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4514 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4462 MARTINSBURG PIKE 291 MACBETH LN 309 MACBETH LN 337 MACBETH LN 361 MACBETH LN 1309 REST CHURCH RD 1221 REST CHURCH RD 173 RUEBUCK RD 191 RUEBUCK RD 120 JOLINE DR 170 JOLINE DR 286 JOLINE DR 320 JOLINE DR 352 JOLINE DR 378 JOLINE DR 343 JOLINE DR 4663 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4552 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4578 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4622 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4294 MARTINSBURG PIKE µ Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: April 30, 2026 £¤11§¨¦81 §¨¦81 TIMBERLAKESLNREST CHURCH R DELFWAY CEDAR HILL R D WINE S A P CT ORCHARDDALE DRWO O D B I N E RDROMEDRSTAYMANDR HAUPTMAN CT RUEBUCK LNMARTINSBURG PIKEWOODSIDE RDROCKY LN BUSINESS BLVD BRANS O N SPRIN G R D THISTLE LN JOLINE DR RUEBUCKRDBROWNLNMACBE T H L N 0 975 1,950487.5 Feet BERKELEY COUNTY WV REZ # 04 - 26: Virginia Technology Park PINs: 33 - A - 89, 33 - A - 90, 33 - 9 - 1A Rezoning from RA to TM with Proffers Long Range Land Use Map Application Sewer and Water Service Area Parcels Long Range Land Use Business Mixed Use Industrial/Office Industrial REZ #04-26 REZ #04-26 REZ #04-26 21 £¤11 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 RESTCHURCH R D WOODBI N E R D JONATH A N D R MARTINSBURGPIKESTAYMANDRTIMBERLAKES LNREST CHURCH R D JOLINE D R HAUPTMAN CT RUEBUCK RDRUEBUCK LN REST CHURC H R D ZACHARY ANN LNMACBE T H L N MARTINSBURGPIKE33 A 89 33 A 90 33 A 90 33 A 90 33 9 1A 1089 REST CHURCH RD 1171 REST CHURCH RD 291 MACBETH LN 309 MACBETH LN 337 MACBETH LN 361 MACBETH LN 1309 REST CHURCH RD 1221 REST CHURCH RD 173 RUEBUCK RD 191 RUEBUCK RD 374 ORCHARD DALE DR 155 JONATHAN DR 120 JOLINE DR 170 JOLINE DR 4552 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4622 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4294 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1073 REST CHURCH RD 976 REST CHURCH RD 988 REST CHURCH RD 1004 REST CHURCH RD 1018 REST CHURCH RD 1090 REST CHURCH RD 1102 REST CHURCH RD 1226 REST CHURCH RD 1299 REST CHURCH RD 1120 REST CHURCH RD 1130 REST CHURCH RD 130 RUEBUCK LN 172 RUEBUCK LN 224 RUEBUCK LN 280 RUEBUCK LN 4491 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4481 MARTINSBURG PIKE 147 WINESAP CT 4273 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4317 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4230 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4231 MARTINSBURG PIKE 279 ZACHARY ANN LN 321 ZACHARY ANN LN 351 ZACHARY ANN LN 344 ORCHARD DALE DR 241 STAYMAN DR 200 STAYMAN DR 201 JONATHAN DR 163 JONATHAN DR 196 RUEBUCK RD 1287 REST CHURCH RD 1287 REST CHURCH RD 114 RUEBUCK RD 160 RUEBUCK RD 180 RUEBUCK RD 286 JOLINE DR 320 JOLINE DR 352 JOLINE DR 378 JOLINE DR 343 JOLINE DR 4663 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4374 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4514 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4462 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1029 REST CHURCH RD 1035 REST CHURCH RD 1109 REST CHURCH RD 1145 REST CHURCH RD 191 MACBETH LN 191 MACBETH LN 209 MACBETH LN 253 MACBETH LN 266 MACBETH LN 367 MACBETH LN 371 MACBETH LN 1345 REST CHURCH RD 135 RUEBUCK RD 147 RUEBUCK RD 221 RUEBUCK RD 185 STAYMAN DR 159 STAYMAN DR 151 STAYMAN DR 306 ORCHARD DALE DR 210 JOLINE DR 4586 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4600 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4322 MARTINSBURG PIKE 162 ROME DR 946 REST CHURCH RD 964 REST CHURCH RD 1034 REST CHURCH RD 1046 REST CHURCH RD 1062 REST CHURCH RD 1076 REST CHURCH RD 1333 REST CHURCH RD 332 THISTLE LN 1146 REST CHURCH RD 1160 REST CHURCH RD 1176 REST CHURCH RD 1188 REST CHURCH RD 160 MACBETH LN 160 MACBETH LN 4469 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4455 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4441 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4407 MARTINSBURG PIKE 259 WINESAP CT 223 WINESAP CT 197 WINESAP CT 4282 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4268 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4170 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4123 MARTINSBURG PIKE 1530 REST CHURCH RD 240 STAYMAN DR 180 JONATHAN DR338 ORCHARD DALE DR 260 JOLINE DR 382 JOLINE DR 381 JOLINE DR375 JOLINE DR 367 JOLINE DR 215 JOLINE DR 201 JOLINE DR 193 JOLINE DR 4547 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4342 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4392 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4412 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4504 MARTINSBURG PIKE 4428 MARTINSBURG PIKE 529 TIMBERLAKES LN 124 HAUPTMAN CT 141 HAUPTMAN CT 163 HAUPTMAN CT 209 HAUPTMAN CT µ Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: April 30, 2026 £¤11§¨¦81 §¨¦81 TIMBERLAKESLNREST CHURCH R DELFWAY CEDAR HILL R D WINE S A P CT ORCHARDDALE DRWO O D B I N E RDROMEDRSTAYMANDR HAUPTMAN CT RUEBUCK LNMARTINSBURG PIKEWOODSIDE RDROCKY LN BUSINESS BLVD BRANS O N SPRIN G R D THISTLE LN JOLINE DR RUEBUCKRDBROWNLNMACBE T H L N 0 975 1,950487.5 Feet BERKELEY COUNTY WV REZ # 04 - 26: Virginia Technology Park PINs: 33 - A - 89, 33 - A - 90, 33 - 9 - 1A Rezoning from RA to TM with Proffers Zoning Map Application Sewer and Water Service Area Parcels B2 (General Business District) B3 (Industrial Transition District) M1 (Light Industrial District) M2 (Industrial General District) REZ #04-26 REZ #04-26 REZ #04-26 22 23 24 25 26 27 Comment List Virginia Technology Park 5/19/2026 Staff Concerns Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 The Proposed rezoning may not meet the Northeast Land Use Plan’s statement that “Uses which significantly contribute to air, noise, and light pollution as well as businesses that create large volumes of truck traffic are discouraged in these areas.” Without adequate mitigation that may not currently be fully accommodated within the proffer statement, particularly in regarding the areas of traffic mitigation during the construction of a data center facility, noise, and air pollution. On construction traffic, the Applicant has revised Proffer 3(N) to restrict the hours in which external construction is to take place on the Property to Monday through Saturday, from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., with no construction or delivery to take place on the major holidays listed in Proffer 2(D). The Applicant has provided in Proffer 3(O) to construct any necessary traffic improvements to support the construction of the proposed use, with such improvements to be determined at time of site plan. On noise, the Applicant has revised Proffers 2(D) and 2(H) to reflect a sound limitation of 70 dBA at the property line where the Property borders properties zoned B3 or M1, or where there are public utilities, and 60 dBA where the Property abuts those properties used for residential uses. Such limitation has been revised to include emergency operation of generators on the Property. On air pollution, the Applicant has revised Proffer 2(C) to require Tier IV compliant generators on the Property, or those with equivalent or lower emissions, and that such generators shall be permitted as emergency generation units, as defined by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. 2 While the applicant has taken steps in the proffers to buffer residential properties to the south and west with earthen berms and landscaping, it’s important to recognize this area is a transition area between comprehensive planned “Mixed Use Industrial/Office” and the rural western portion of the County. This will be potentially the first of the commercial/industrial properties in this important zone along the west side of I-81 to develop and as such has the opportunity to set the standard for how the transition between rural and commercial/industrial will look and impact rural neighbors. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(F) to include additional design requirements, to include a list of permissible materials, architectural features, overall design consistency, bird-friendly design elements, and a requirement for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator. The Applicant has added Proffer 2(I), which requires the Applicant to provide Frederick County with a written Design Guidelines manual, which shall govern all buildings constructed on the Property. 3 The applicant’s analysis of noise impacts for the proposed data center use indicates a significant increase in noise impacting the western property boundaries of the property. While on the eastern portion of the property the noise generation does not exceed current noise profiles generated by existing uses and I-81, on the western portion there is an approximately 20 dBA increase in noise. The Applicant has revised Proffers 2(D) and 2(H) to reflect a sound limit of 60 dBA where the Property abuts properties primarily used for residential uses. This is consistent with the sound ordinance contained in Frederick County Code Section 118-4, which limits mechanical equipment in the R4, RP, R5, and MH1 zoning districts to 60 dBA. The Applicant has also revised its equipment parameters to reflect quieter chiller technology, and conducted a second sound study to reflect these updated parameters. Based on its updated sound study, the Applicant expects sound levels to remain 28 While within ordinance requirements (not to exceed 70 dBA) for the proposed zoning district, in terms of impact to adjoining properties, particularly residences, the noise generated by the proposed use could be perceived as approximately 4 times louder to the human ear. between 50 and 55 dBA during normal operation, and 60 dBA or below during emergency operation. 4 The application and proffers note significant water needs, but provide little detail on the provision of upgrades to the system required to accommodate those needs in order to provide that volume of water and sewer service to this property. The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(A) to require that the acquisition of any off-site easements necessary to provide adequate water and sanitary sewer service to the Property shall be funded by the Applicant. The Applicant has coordinated with Frederick Water to ensure that the proposed demand of 120,000 gallons per day average can be delivered to the Property with no upgrades to the sanitary water or sewer system required. 5 Inclusion of power generating facilities in the allowed uses inserts a significant unstudied, and potentially concerning unknown for this property. Given the proximity of a future substation and major transmission line, this use could be reasonably excluded. The Applicant has revised Proffer 1(B) to exclude “Public Utilities, including power-generating facilities” from the list of permitted by-right uses on the Property, and Proffer 1(D) to exclude electricity generation as a permitted accessory use, with the exception of on-site, emergency use generators. 6 Tier II generators with selective catalytic reduction systems are proffered for use. While it is the understanding of staff that Tier II are selected to stay within the regulations of emergency use as regulated by DEQ, it is also our understanding that Tier IV generation is 90% cleaner operating and can be permitted to not be subject to emergency use regulation by DEQ upon request by applicant. New legislation is pushing data center users toward the use of Tier IV technology and staff discussions with DEQ staff would indicate that the applicant could proffer Tier IV technology and agree by proffer to remain subject to emergency use only in their DEQ permit. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(C) to reflect that all generators on the property shall be Tier IV compliant, or those with equivalent or lower emission rates. The Applicant has also revised this proffer to reflect that all generators shall be emergency generation units, as defined by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. 7 Staff is seeking information or data on frequency and duration of emergency scenarios. If the applicant has any industry data on this topic, it would be beneficial. The Applicant has found that, according to Shenandoah Valley Electric Cooperative’s annual report from 2024, which was the most recent report available, customers experienced 2.95 average outages per member for that year, with an average total outage time of 8 hours per member for that year. 8 Given the rapidly advancing technology for equipment in this industry, a proffered equipment monitoring and upgrade to modern standard schedule may be appropriate. Additional line should be added to the noise limitation proffer noting that regardless of proffer current zoning ordinance will be met. Proffer 2(D) states that all sound generated by on-site generators shall be limited to 70 dBA where the Property abuts properties zoned B3, M1, or which are used for public utility uses, 60 dBA where the Property abuts those properties used for residential uses, and shall otherwise comply with Section 165- 201 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant has removed the previous Proffer 2(E), which exempted emergency operation of the on-site generators from 29 the proffered noise limitations. This means that even during emergency operations, the Applicant will be held to the sound limitations contained in the Proffers. Proffer 2(H) states that sound levels at the adjacent property lines shall not exceed 70 dBA where the Property abuts properties zoned B3, M1, or which are used for public utility uses, 60 dBA where the Property abuts properties which are primarily used for residential uses, and shall otherwise comply with Section 165-201 of the Zoning Ordinance. 9 A number of facade elements are included in the proffers, which note “some” of them shall be included. However, the examples listed have varying levels of impact and commitment. Staff would suggest this section could be more robust and include more specific and enforceable examples in order to provide greater certainty to decision makers and neighboring residents. A discussion of building heights or even varying building heights dependent on proximity to residential units may be appropriate. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(F) to strengthen the design requirements for the Property, and to require building elevations be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval to confirm substantial conformance with the design proffers. The Applicant has drafted Proffer 2(I) to require building design, architectural, and use-related standards to be incorporated into a written Design Guidelines manual, which shall govern all buildings constructed on the Property, which shall be provided to Frederick County prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, and shall thereafter be provided to any future owners, lessees, or operators of buildings constructed on the Property. The Applicant would note that increased building height is a direct contributor to sound attenuation on the neighboring properties, and part of the Applicant’s sound mitigation strategy. 10 Proffer states that only public water and sewer will be used for cooling of computer or mechanical equipment systems. A more appropriate proffer would expressly prohibit use of on-site wells or private groundwater sources for any reason. The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(G) to reflect that no groundwater resources via private on-site wells shall be used for any use on the Property. 11 While potentially not a proffer more information is needed on specific upgrades to the public water and sewer system to accommodate the proposed water usage of the facility and how those upgrades will be achieved to ensure unforeseen impacts are not had on other property owners. For example, will all upgrades be contained within existing Frederick Water easements and the applicant’s property or will new or expanded easements be acquired from other property owners? The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(A) to reflect that all on-site and off-site improvements necessary to provide service for the demand generated by the proposed development, to include the acquisition of any required off-site easements, shall be paid for by the Applicant. The Applicant has coordinated with Frederick Water, and Frederick Water has informed the Applicant that the level of service requested and proffered to, 120,000 gallons of water per day based on the Monthly Average Gallons Per Day standard, can be provided to the Applicant. The Applicant has included an email from Frederick Water detailing projected capacity in its revised application. 12 The applicant’s proffers do not currently contemplate a maximum level of water usage per day. The Applicant has included a new Proffer 7(B) which limits the Applicant to 120,000 gallons of water per day, using the Monthly Average Gallons Per Day standard. The Applicant has also proffered to coordinate with Frederick Water to install any and all equipment necessary to enforce this limitation, and to provide usage information to the Frederick County Zoning Administrator upon request. 30 Planning Commission Concerns: Water Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 No use of groundwater. The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(G) to reflect that no groundwater shall be used on the Property for any reason. 2 More information on the removal of glycol from the water. How and where it’s treated with the key focus on how contaminants are not being introduced into our groundwater. The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(F) to reflect its coordination with Frederick Water on the treatment of any discharge from cooling systems. The Applicant will construct and maintain any pre-treatment facilities requested by Frederick Water in accordance with Frederick Water’s requirements, or shall contract with third-party contractors to transport discharge for pre-treatment, and shall fund any required transportation of such cooling fluids to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility for secondary pre-treatment prior to being subjected to standard wastewater protocols. 3 Concerns about the overall volume of water. The Applicant has inserted a new Proffer 7(B), which restricts the Applicant to 120,000 gallons of water per day using the Monthly Average Gallons Per Day standard, which requires the Applicant to coordinate with Frederick Water to install all equipment necessary to enforce the limitation of its water use, and requires collected data is to be provided to the Zoning Administrator upon request. The Applicant has coordinated with Frederick Water to ensure that the requested amount of water can be provided with no impact to Frederick Water’s existing customers. In the event that Frederick Water receives indication that the Applicant has exceeded its allotment of water, Frederick Water is empowered to deny service to the Applicant. 4 Potentially proffering a closed loop system was contemplated, or proffering out systems that use significant water. Under Proffer 7(E), the Applicant has proffered to utilize systems which minimize the use of potable water. 5 More information is desired on the extent to which the offsite system for Frederick Water needs to be upgraded and how those upgrades take place, including where and if additional easements are needed. The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(A) to reflect that the Applicant shall be responsible for any expenses associated with upgrades which may be required at a future date, to include the acquisition of off-site easements. 6 Potential for on-site water treatment (Third-party treatment and removal was also mentioned). The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(F) to reflect that any pre- treatment required by Frederick Water shall be performed at the Applicant’s expense, that the Applicant shall bear the cost of constructing any pre-treatment facilities, or contracting with a third party to conduct pre-treatment, and that any cooling fluid discharge shall be transported to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility for additional pre-treatment at the Applicant’s expense, in coordination with Frederick Water. 7 Monitoring wells during construction. The Applicant has included Proffer 7(H), which requires that the Applicant install monitoring wells during the construction of the proposed development. The Applicant has also proffered to fund the drilling of replacement wells on the adjoining properties in the event that the development activities damage the wells of the adjoining properties. 8 Glycol based systems – Applicant needs to show actual units. (Present time, may change but this is the technology they have now.) Describe how they work. At present time, the Applicant does not have an end user for the proposed development, and cannot commit to a specific cooling technology. 31 9 Glycol systems do not typically discharge to sanitary sewers. If they do, specialized treatment must be done before discharge. Normally glycol based liquids are sent off site via truck for specialized treatment. The Applicant has revised Proffer 7(F) to reflect the procedure for any cooling liquids in coordination with Frederick Water. Any cooling liquid to be disposed of would be pre-treated on- site or by a third-party contractor, and then transported via truck, at the Applicant’s expense, to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility. It would then be treated in accordance with Frederick Water’s Significant Industrial User Program (“SIUP”) before being processed in accordance with standard wastewater protocols. 10 If they are using closed loop glycol based systems why do they need so much water? – 120,000/day The 120,000 gallons per day average, based on the Monthly Average Gallon Per Day standard promulgated by Frederick Water and contained in Proffer 7(B), reflects the capacity that Frederick Water can provide to the proposed development with no upgrades to its existing infrastructure. This number also reflects the anticipated maximum need of the proposed use, with daily operation requiring a lower amount on average. 11 Discrepancy between sanitary uses – letter said 10,000/day, presenter stated 20,000/day. That’s very high for only drinking water, toilets and shower facilities. According to the email from Frederick Water, the projected water demand would be 10,000 to 20,000 gallons per day on average for domestic water consumption, such as restrooms, employee dining facilities, and cleaning. The remaining 100,000 to 110,000 gallons per day would support cooling system technologies. Frederick Water would size the water line and water meter to ensure that water service does not exceed 120,000 gallons per day. 12 FW (Frederick Water) has the capacity to supply 120,000 gpm. How do we limit? Can FW impose a cost escalation if they go over the daily allotment? Say a severe penalty. If water is $5/1,000, the price jumps to $50/1,000g. Under Proffer 7(B), the Applicant shall coordinate with Frederick Water to install any and all equipment necessary to monitor and enforce the limitation of 120,000 gallons per day average, and all collected data is to be provided to the Zoning Administrator upon request. This is reflected in the included email from Frederick Water. As discussed at the Data Center Q&A on May 7, 2026, in the event that the Applicant exceeds the 120,000 gallons per day average under the Monthly Average Gallons Per Day standard, Frederick Water is empowered to deny potable water service or sanitary sewer service to the Applicant, as applicable. Planning Commission Concerns: Sound Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 Concerns over expected noise levels and also a comparison to how much noise a residential property is allowed were brought up. Near the end of the meeting one planning commissioner even seemed to say any noise increase for neighbors is a concern. Under Frederick County Code Section 118-4, operating mechanical equipment in the R4, RP, R5, or MH1 zoning districts which generates sound above 60 dBA is prohibited. Under Proffers 2(D) and 2(H), the Applicant is proffering to comply with this 60 dBA standard where the Property abuts residential properties, complying not only with the noise ordinance for industrial uses, but for residential uses. 2 Updating of noise study to reflect use of Tier IV if that is being proffered. I would also note the proffer would need to include NOT requesting non- emergency use as part of DEQ permit. Permit must be for emergency use only. Under Proffer 2(C), the Applicant has proffered to utilize Tier IV compliant generators or those with equivalent or lower emission rates. The Applicant has commenced its updated sound study to assess the impact that the use of Tier IV compliant generators would have on the sound contour for the proposed use. That Proffer also requires that all generators be only operated during emergencies, with the exception of testing and cycling for maintenance. 32 3 I'm also not sure if the previous study considered the berms. I'm not sure if this is something that needs to be considered The Applicant’s most recent sound study does not include the berming around the facility. The Applicant defers to its acoustic consultant for additional discussion. 4 Also, regarding new study, we definitely need that as soon as reasonably possible for vetting by the County's sound consultant. The Applicant will provide its updated sound study to County Staff as soon as it is available. 5 Concerns regarding low frequencies were raised as well as their potential impacts. While some low frequency information is included in the updated sound study, the Applicant’s acoustic consultant has noted that industry-standard datasets only go to the 63 Hz octave band, and do not include the 20 Hz octave band. 6 "The sound study only registered frequencies down to 63hz for some reason. People can hear down to 20hz, and as we all know, it is the lowest frequencies on the scale that have garnered the most concerns with the public. Would you be able to ask that they add measurements down to 20hz and any additional information or explanation as to what those measurements mean in context to this project?" The Applicant’s acoustic consultant has noted that industry- standard datasets only go to the 63 Hz octave band, and do not include the 20 Hz octave band. 7 The Planning Commission is extremely concerned about noise and looking for further study and more mitigation measures than are currently or have been currently evaluated within the sound study. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(B) to reflect phasing construction of the berm with the construction of buildings on the Property. The Applicant has revised Proffers 2(D) and 2(H) to reflect conformity with the noise ordinance for residential uses standard of 60 dBA where the Property abuts residential uses, as contained in Frederick County Code Section 118-4. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(C) to restrict generator operation to emergencies only, outside of testing and cycling, as defined by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(D) to restrict testing and cycling generators between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., to not test or cycle them on major holidays, to test and cycle no more than 15% of generators on the Property at a given time. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(E) to reflect sound mitigation measures on mechanical equipment, to require a supplementary Environmental Noise Impact Assessment, and to require additional assessments to the Zoning Administrator no later than 12 months after the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Property, to do so every 12 months thereafter for five years or until all buildings are operational, whichever occurs later in time, and to fund the purchase of a digital sound level meter for the Frederick County Department of Planning & Development to monitor the sound levels on the Property. The Applicant has revised Proffer 3(N) to limit external construction activity to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no external construction 33 work to take place on weekends or major holidays, as defined in Proffer 2(D). The Applicant has asked its acoustic engineer to provide an updated sound study to reflect additional mitigation measures and the use of Tier IV compliant generators, and will provide this study to County Staff at the earliest opportunity. The Applicant notes that such generators are typically contained within enclosures to mitigate sound generated, and has included an example enclosure rendering in its revised application materials. 8 Strategies for noise management during generator cycling. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(D) to limit testing and cycling to no more than 15% of the generators present on the Property at a given time. 9 More information on generator containment structures may be needed and whether they are the maximum or whether there can be even greater noise reduction/control. The Applicant has included an example generator enclosure in its revised application materials. 10 Proffering of noise monitoring and reporting. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(E) to require additional assessments to the Zoning Administrator no later than 12 months after the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Property, to do so every 12 months thereafter for five years or until all buildings are operational, whichever occurs later in time, and to fund the purchase of a digital sound level meter for the Frederick County Department of Planning & Development to monitor the sound levels on the Property. Planning Commission Concerns: Air Quality Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 Tier IV generators The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(C) to require Tier IV compliant generators or those with equivalent or lower emission rates. 2 Potential use of Natural Gas or propane instead of diesel to power generators The Applicant has investigated the possibility of using natural gas to provide fuel for on-site generators. Using natural gas would require a pipeline of approximately 36 inches in diameter to supply fuel to the on-site generators, and would necessitate the acquisition of hundreds of feet of off-site easements to provide natural gas service to the Property. Planning Commission Concerns: Traffic Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 Concern was raised about the 1% growth rate used in the TIA. A PC member was seeking greater justification of that. Or use of the County's estimated growth. When the traffic study was scoped by the Applicant’s traffic engineer, the 1% growth figure was agreed to by both the Virginia Department of Transportation and Frederick County Staff. This figure was used because it accounts for many of the planned and undeveloped properties in the area that will be generating future growth, to include the Arogas parcel, Parcel 33-A-12, Parcel 33-9-4, and the undeveloped portions of the Whitehall Commerce Center. The email from the Applicant’s traffic engineer explaining the reasoning behind the 1% growth rate in greater detail has been included in the Applicant’s revised application materials. 34 2 The potential of proffering out additional higher traffic uses was raised as well. Staff mentioned that trip caps may be the answer or part of the answer. Staff had noted in our report that the new TIA and implementation of recommended improvements proffers could be tighter to remove potential future conflicts. Perhaps a combination of these items is the answer. The Applicant has revised Proffers 1(B) and 1(C) to reflect the removal of most of the higher traffic uses. The only remaining permitted uses are the proposed use, Flex Tech, and any uses that become by-right in the TM zoning district at a later date. The Applicant has revised Proffer 3(N) to reflect limitations on construction activity to between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no deliveries to take place during morning and evening peak traffic hours Monday through Friday. The Applicant has provided in Proffer 3(D) to construct off-site improvements to the intersection of Rest Church Road and Martinsburg Pike. The Applicant has provided in Proffer 3(O) to construct any necessary traffic improvements to support the construction of the proposed use, with such improvements to be determined at time of site plan. 3 Construction work week and hours was raised as a concern needing greater information and potential proffer controls. The Applicant has revised Proffer 3(N) to reflect that construction on the external portions of the buildings to be placed on the Property shall be between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction to take place on the major holidays listed in Proffer 2(D). The Applicant has provided in Proffer 3(O) to construct any necessary traffic improvements to support the construction of the proposed use, with such improvements to be determined at time of site plan. Planning Commission Concerns: Architecture Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 Much more surety and enforceability is desired for architectural standards. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(F) to reflect more stringent requirements for building materials, a written Design Guidelines manual to be provided to Frederick County, and that elevations are to be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval consistent with the proffered restrictions. 2 More information on visual impacts and viewshed analysis and sample graphics and I also have received a request that when the visuals are created that focus on residential that the same be done for the view from I-81 in which visual renderings are provided. This was brought by a PC member but as noted in the staff report the NELUP does discuss this area as an important visual gateway for the County and this has also been raised by some citizens. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(F) to reflect more stringent requirements for building materials, a written Design Guidelines manual to be provided to Frederick County, and that elevations are to be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval consistent with the proffered restrictions. The Applicant has supplied additional cross sections for illustrative purposes, and will provide viewshed analyses from the adjoining parcels as soon as they become available. 3 Building design standards in general. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(F) to reflect more stringent requirements for building materials, a written Design Guidelines manual to be provided to Frederick County, and that elevations are to be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval consistent with the proffered restrictions. 35 4 Consistency of design and architecture across the development was noted as a concern. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(F) to reflect more stringent requirements for building materials, a written Design Guidelines manual to be provided to Frederick County, and that elevations are to be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval consistent with the proffered restrictions. 5 Building heights were raised as a concern and this ties into the above. One planning commissioner noted designs where chillers were inside as a possibility. Another mentioned single story and a 3rd even mentioned an underground scenario or component. The Applicant has considered variations in building height for the proposed campus. However, building heights are a factor in the Applicant’s sound attenuation plan. Due to how sound travels, a higher building will place the source of the sound farther from the person hearing it, and it will be quieter as a result. Lower buildings would also permit the sound to travel further. Planning Commission Concerns: Other Plan/Proffer Revisions 1 More information on phasing of the development overall, particularly how and when screening amenities go in. The Applicant has revised Proffer 2(B) to reflect that the berming to visually screen the proposed buildings shall be phased with the construction of each building, and that such phasing shall be determined at time of site plan. 2 I believe more information and detail is sought on potential job creation. Adjusting the FI model to account for remote/workers who live outside the County. i. Total jobs ii. Salaries iii. Local or remote workers iv. Shifts The Applicant’s fiscal impact consultant, McGuireWoods Consulting, LLC, has prepared an updated fiscal impact assessment to account for these variables, along with a separate analysis of the occupational categories and responsibilities, shift work, and wages. Copies of these reports are included in the Applicant’s revised application materials. 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 5086769v2 / 6260-16 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHNOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 ACRES Rezoning: REZ # _________________________ Record Owners: DTS, L.C. and William O. Minor Applicant: Executive Land Holdings IV, LLC Property: PIN’s 33-(A)-89; 33-(A)-90; & 33-(9)-1A, comprising approximately 220.06 acres as shown on the Generalized Development Plan (hereinafter the “Property”) Sought Zoning: RA to TM Project Name: Virginia Technology Park Rezoning Original Proffer Date: August 4, 2025 Revision Dates: April 6, 2026; May 19, 2026 Pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2296, et seq., and § 165-102.06 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance (“Zoning Ordinance”), Executive Land Holdings IV, LLC (hereinafter “Applicant”) together with the record owners of the Property, DTS, L.C. and William O. Minor (hereinafter, “Record Owners”) hereby proffer that the development and use of the Property shall be in substantial conformance with the following conditions (hereinafter, “Proffers”). In the event this sought rezoning to the TM Technology Manufacturing Park (TM”) zoning district is approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors (“Board”) as applied for by the Applicant, these Proffers shall supersede and replace in their entirety any and all other proffers made prior hereto with respect to the Property. In the event this rezoning is not granted as applied for by the Applicant, then these Proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and shall be null and void, and any existing proffers will remain in full force and effect. 61 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 2 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 The headings of the Proffers set forth below have been prepared for convenience or reference only and shall not control or affect the meaning or be taken as an interpretation of any provision of the Proffers. Any improvements proffered herein below shall be provided at the time of development of the portion of the site served by the improvement, unless otherwise specified. The term “Applicant” shall include the current and all future owners and successors in interest. When used in these Proffers, the “Generalized Development Plan” or “GDP” shall refer to the plan entitled “Virginia Technology Park Rezoning, Frederick County, VA,” prepared by Bohler Engineering and dated 3/3/2026. 1. DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF THE PROPERTY A. The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the GDP, with interconnected land bays in substantial conformance with the GDP, and as is specifically set forth in these Proffers. As determined in any forthcoming Master Development Plan (“MDP”) and/or site plan submissions, minor changes and adjustments may be made to the road alignments, entrances, parking, dimensions, and locations of the stormwater management/best management practices facilities, the exact configuration and location of building footprints, and other similar features as shown on the GDP. B. The following uses, which are permitted by-right in the TM zoning district, shall be prohibited on the Property: Food, Beverage, and Tobacco Manufacturing Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing Converted Paper Product Manufacturing Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing Printing, Publishing and Allied Industries 62 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 3 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing Fabricated Metal Products Manufacturing, including the following: Engraving and Allied Services, Ammunition, Ordnance and Accessories Machinery Manufacturing and Computer and Electrical Product Manufacturing Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing Storage Batteries and Primary Battery Manufacturing Aircraft Manufacturing Guided Missiles and Space Vehicles Manufacturing Miscellaneous Manufacturing Telecommunication Facilities and Offices, Broadcasting and Content Providers, including wired and wireless telephone, radio, television and other satellite communications Finance, Insurance, Legal and Offices of Real Estate Professional, Scientific and Technical Services including Testing Laboratories Health Care Services Medical and Dental Laboratories Technical and Trade Schools Business, Professional, Labor, Political and Similar Organizations Public Administration and Government Support Buildings 63 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 4 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Public Utilities, including power-generating facilities C. The following uses permitted by-right in the TM zoning district shall be permitted on the Property: Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, and Data Centers Flex-Tech And permitted uses later added to the list of permitted use in the TM zoning district regulations by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. D. The Property may also be developed with uses customarily associated with or accessory to technology industrial and manufacturing parks and any such public facilities are approved pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-2232 (D). Such accessory uses and/or public facilities shall include, but shall not be limited to: Access roads (public or private); Electric power transforming station; Buildings for support offices, storage, logistics, maintenance, and security; Electricity distribution, switchyard, transmission, and substation facilities; Enclosed energy, battery, and fuel storage facilities; Water storage, treatment, and cooling facilities and associated water pumps, tanks, and equipment; Communication, broadband, and fiber optic utilities; 64 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 5 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Air handlers, cooling equipment, and heat pumps; All critical infrastructure related to data centers, including but not limited to, generators; All other utilities, public or private, in each case together with all other supporting uses that relate to and support the permitted use(s) constructed on the property (the “Accessory Uses”), or any other use determined by the Zoning Administrator. E. If the Applicant elects to develop the Property with any use or uses permitted by-right in the TM zoning district, listed in Proffer 1 (C) above, that results in a higher net new trip generation from the Property than that shown in the “Transportation Impact Analysis for the Fruit Hill Property,” prepared by Kittelson and Associates, dated June 2025 (the “TIA”), then as part of the MDP and/or site plan approval process for those uses, the Applicant shall submit an updated TIA to Frederick County (“County”) and the Virginia Department of Transportation (“VDOT”). Subject to County and VDOT approval of the updated TIA, the Applicant shall mitigate any additional impacts caused by such additional trips through transportation improvements determined through the site plan approval process. In the event that the County and VDOT approve the updated TIA, such improvements recommended by the TIA shall be bonded prior to the approval of the MDP or site plan, and shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the Property. F. In determining whether the uses collectively have an increased traffic impact for purposes of Proffer 1 (E), the Applicant may use actual traffic counts for then- existing uses on the Property in lieu of the estimates that were employed in the TIA, for determining background traffic at the time of site plan submission. 2. BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN A. Perimeter landscaping shall be provided in substantial conformance with the GDP. All new landscaping/plantings shall be indigenous species, native to Virginia. The Applicant may include, as part of its perimeter landscaping, existing, mature woodlands located on the Property. Such woodlands to be 65 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 6 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 preserved as part of the perimeter landscaping shall be depicted on the landscaping plan, which shall be submitted at time of site plan. B. The Applicant shall construct an 8-foot landscaped berm along the Property’s boundary with lots in the Carrollton Subdivision and the Ridgeway Estates Subdivision in accordance with the details thereof on the GDP. Where no berm is provided adjacent to RA zoned parcels, the Applicant shall preserve existing vegetation not more than 75 feet from the perimeter property line to serve as a natural buffer or increase the building setback to 200 feet, as depicted on the GDP. The final location of the landscaped berm shall be determined at time of site plan. Construction of such berm shall be phased alongside construction of the buildings on the Property. Phasing of such berm shall be determined at the time of site plan. C. All backup generators used on the Property shall comply with the ambient air quality standards promulgated by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and shall be Tier IV compliant generators, or those with equivalent or lower emission rates, as defined by the applicable United States Department of Environmental Protection Agency Regulations. The generators shall be permitted to be emergency generation units, as defined by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, shall only be operated during an emergency loss of electricity, with the exception of Proffer 2(D) below, and shall be permitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality for emergency use only, with the exception of Proffer 2(D) below. D. Generator testing and cycling shall be limited to weekdays (Monday to Friday) between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. In addition, no generator testing nor cycling shall occur on the following major holidays: New Year’s Eve, New Year’s Day, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Thanksgiving, Independence Day, Labor Day, and Memorial Day. No more than fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of generators on the Property shall be tested or cycled at a given time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this provision shall not prohibit the operation of generators outside of the stated hours and dates in the case of power failure requiring backup generator use. All sound generated by any onsite generator shall be limited to 70 dBA where the Property abuts properties zoned B3, M1, or which are used for public utility uses, to 60 dBA where the Property 66 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 7 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 abuts properties which are primarily used for residential uses, and shall otherwise comply with Section 165-201 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. E. All mechanical equipment required for cooling or ventilation of any computer or mechanical equipment systems shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following sound mitigation elements: Low sound emission fans; Acoustical wraps for compressors and oil separators; and An acoustic perimeter. For the purposes of this Proffer, an acoustical perimeter may be louvered or solid, and may include a perimeter around a group of individual chillers. Prior to site plan approval, the Applicant shall submit a supplementary Environmental Noise Impact Assessment based upon the specific mechanical equipment proposed for installation that shall demonstrate conformance with §165-204.41 (E) of the Zoning Ordinance. Not later than twelve (12) months after the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Property and commencement of permitted uses on the Property, the Applicant shall submit a supplementary Environmental Noise Impact Assessment to the Zoning Administrator, in order to demonstrate conformance with these Proffers and the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant shall submit additional supplementary Environmental Noise Impact Assessments to the Zoning Administrator every twelve (12) months thereafter for a duration of five (5) years or until all buildings are operational with permitted uses, whichever event occurs later in time, and shall otherwise comply with Section 165- 204.41.E(2) of the Zoning Ordinance. Concurrent with issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Property, the Applicant shall contribute to the Treasurer of Frederick County a one-time sum of $10,000.00 for the purpose of facilitating the purchase of a digital sound 67 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 8 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 level meter, for the purpose of providing the Frederick County Department of Planning & Development and Frederick County Zoning Administrator with equipment to measure the sound levels at the property lines for the Property and in other areas of the County. F. Building Design. All principal buildings constructed on the Property shall be subject to the following standards for building design. Principal Building Facades. All Principal Building Facades, which for the purposes of this Proffer is defined as all building facades that face Technology Park Road, Zachary Ann Lane, Rest Church Road, and/or Ruebuck Lane, with no intervening structures between the building façade and the aforementioned road, and with no individual building having more than two (2) Principal Building Facades, shall include some or all the following design elements: Fenestration, consisting of glass or glass architectural panels, comprising a minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the Principal Façade and located in separate, individual placement or clustered bays, with each placement or bay counting toward no more than 7.5% of such total surface coverage area, and with such fenestration compatible with the other design, materials, details, and treatment used on the same Principal Façade; A minimum of two distinct exterior surface material(s), which may be accomplished using changes in textures, indentations, and/or etching of pre-cast concrete panels, or using a minimum of two different materials listed below; 68 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 9 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Use of accent materials on a minimum of 10% of the façade; and The primary entrance of a building shall be highlighted with an entry feature such as an awning, roof feature, trellis, or other decorative elements to differentiate the primary entrance from the other portions of the design. Such primary building entrance shall contrast with the surrounding building plane by providing tinted glass, painted doors, or recessed or projecting features that will create a shaded effect. The exterior of any and all data center buildings on the Property may be composed of the following building materials: Brick – solid or modular; Concrete masonry units – split-faced or burnished; Precast concrete; Concrete tilt-wall; Glass – clear; Glass – architectural panels; Metal panels; Native stone (or synthetic equivalent); Tile masonry/terra cotta; Stucco/EIFS (reinforced); Brick – panel/veneer; Cement fiber board/cementitious siding; Gypsum Reinforced Fiber Concrete; Pre-cast concrete (for trim and cornice elements only) Cast stone; or Fiber reinforced plastic. The design elements demonstrating conformance with this Proffer shall be depicted on building elevations and exterior 69 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 10 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 drawings and submitted with the MDP or at time of site plan for the principal buildings facing Technology Park Road, Zachary Ann Lane, Rest Church Road and/or Ruebuck Lane. Said building elevations submitted with the MDP or at time of site plan shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval to confirm substantial conformance with this Proffer 2(F). Said data center buildings shall be consistent with each other in terms of design, materials, details, and treatment. G. The Applicant shall include one or more bird-friendly design elements on the exterior of any and all data center buildings located on the Property. Such elements may include, but shall not be limited to, the use of color, texture, opacity, fritting, frosting, patterns, louvres, screens, interior window treatments, or ultraviolet materials that are visible to birds. The selected element(s) will be identified at time of site plan. H. Sound levels at the adjacent property lines shall not exceed 70 dBA where the Property abuts properties zoned B3, M1, or which are used for public utility uses, shall not exceed 60 dBA where the Property abuts properties which are primarily used for residential uses, and shall otherwise comply with Section 165-201 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. I. These building design and related architectural and use-related standards shall be incorporated into a written Design Guidelines manual that shall govern all buildings constructed on the Property. These Design Guidelines shall be written and provided to Frederick County prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter provided to any future owners, lessees, or operators of buildings constructed on the Property. 70 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 11 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 3. TRANSPORTATION A. The Applicant shall dedicate all rights of way proposed to be dedicated to the County or to VDOT for public road improvements as depicted on the approved GDP in accordance with County and VDOT requirements, or within 90 days of a written request from the County therefor, whichever event may occur earlier in time. B. The Applicant shall relocate a portion of Zachary Ann Lane as generally depicted on the GDP so as to connect with a new road (hereinafter “Technology Park Road”), as that new road is generally depicted on the Northeast Frederick Land Use Plan’s Transportation Map, and as generally shown on the GDP. The Applicant shall construct that portion of Technology Park Road within the boundaries of the Property and along existing rights-of-way, also as generally shown on the GDP. Technology Park Road shall be built within a 50-foot right-of- way, and shall consist of two lanes, with any turn lanes required by VDOT. Technology Park Road shall meet VDOT standards for a GS-3 roadway at the time of construction. C. The Applicant shall construct, or cause to be constructed, frontage improvements along the southern portion of Rest Church Road. Such improvements shall extend from the western right-of-way of Zachary Ann Lane to the entrance of Technology Park Road, as depicted on the GDP, and shall meet VDOT standards for a GS-3 roadway at the time of construction. D. Within 90 days of the request of the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation, and contingent upon a finalized lane conversion plan being approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors and VDOT, the Applicant shall construct, or cause to be constructed, the following improvements to the intersection of Rest Church Road and Martinsburg Pike/US 11: Restripe the eastbound approach lanes of Rest Church Road; 71 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 12 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Convert the Rest Church Road approaches to operate under split-signal phasing; Replace the existing signal head for the eastbound through lane with a four-section head, consisting of three ball indicators and one green left- turn arrow indicator; and Adjust coordination with the adjacent signalized intersections at the Interstate 81 interchange. E. The Applicant shall reserve, for future dedication to the County or VDOT, 52.5 feet of right-of-way along the northern property line for the expansion of Rest Church Road, from its intersection with Zachary Ann Lane to its intersection with Ruebuck Lane, to be measured from the current centerline of Rest Church Road. This right-of-way shall be reserved to permit the expansion of Rest Church Road in accordance with the Eastern Frederick County Road Plan, and no development may take place within this area reserved for future dedication. Within 90 days of the request of the County and VDOT, and contingent upon a funded and finalized expansion plan being approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, the Applicant shall dedicate such right-of-way at no cost to the County or VDOT. In the event that the Board of Supervisors changes the designation of Rest Church Road, as depicted in the Eastern Frederick County Road Plan, so that the expansion of Rest Church Road is no longer called for in the Eastern Frederick County Road Plan, the reservation of the 52.5-foot right-of- way for future dedication shall cease, and the existing right-of-way width shall be maintained. F. The southern portion of Technology Park Road, as measured from the proposed connectivity to PIN 33-A-88 north to the stem at the southern edge of the proposed traffic bulb, shall be constructed and maintained as a private road, as depicted on the GDP. The Applicant shall reserve, for future dedication to the County or VDOT, 50 feet of right-of-way containing that privately owned and maintained portion of Technology Park Road, to be accepted as a public road in accordance with the Eastern Frederick County Road Plan. Within 90 days of the request of the County and VDOT, and contingent upon a funded and finalized plan being approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to connect 72 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 13 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Technology Park Road to Cedar Hill Road, the Applicant shall dedicate such right- of-way at no cost to the County or VDOT, and that private portion of Technology Park Road shall become a public road. The Applicant shall conduct, or cause to be conducted, any repairs deemed necessary by VDOT prior to the acceptance of that portion of Technology Park Road into the public road network. In the event that the Board of Supervisors changes the Eastern Frederick County Road Plan, so that the proposed connectivity between Rest Church Road and Cedar Hill Road is no longer called for in the Eastern Frederick County Road Plan, the reservation of the 50-foot right-of-way for future dedication shall cease, and the existing ownership of that private portion of Technology Park Road shall be maintained. G. The Applicant shall apply to abandon, or cause to be abandoned, (i) that portion of Ruebuck Lane immediately past the southern boundary of County Parcel Map Pin 33-(5)-24, and (ii) that portion of Zachary Ann Lane no longer required after modification of its entrance and connection to Rest Church Road. H. The Applicant shall dedicate an additional 25 feet of right -of-way along the western property line for Ruebuck Lane, from its revised terminus to Rest Church Road, as depicted on the GDP. It shall further install a 55-foot cul-de-sac or a hammerhead turnaround at the terminus of Ruebuck Lane sufficient to permit emergency and other vehicles to effect a safe turn around, at a location outside the floodplain and past the last residential driveway on Ruebuck Lane. The design and location of the turnaround shall be finalized during MDP and/or site plan review processes. The Applicant shall further, at its expense, upgrade Ruebuck Lane to the standards appropriate for a low volume road in the VDOT Rural Rustic Road Program, and improve the existing sight distance issues at its intersection with Macbeth Lane to a standard appropriate for a low volume road in the VDOT Rural Rustic Road Program, from its intersection with Rest Church Road south to the aforementioned cul-de-sac or turnaround. Such dedication shall be made concurrently with the approval of plans for the improvement of Ruebuck Lane. I. All proffered road improvements to be constructed by the Applicant and those phases of Technology Park Road will be established at the time of Master Development Plan and/or site plan approval, shall be bonded prior to MDP and/or site plan approval, and shall be completed prior to the issuance of the first 73 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 14 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 occupancy permit for any building on the Property; provided that notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the Applicant will dedicate all of the right-of-way for that public portion of Technology Park Road within 60 days of a written request of the County therefor, and provided further that the ultimate location of Technology Park Road may be adjusted for final engineering. J. No entrances to the Property, other than the connection with Technology Park Road and the emergency connection to Rest Church Road, as shown on the GDP, shall be permitted onto Rest Church Road or Ruebuck Lane. K. All public roads shall be constructed to VDOT standards and subject to the approval of VDOT and Frederick County. That private portion of Technology Park Road shall be constructed to the VDOT standards for a GS -3 roadway. Any repairs requested by VDOT prior to public dedication of that private portion of Technology Park Road shall be completed at no cost to the County or VDOT. L. For the purposes of these Proffers, “completion” of a public road improvement shall mean when a road or improvement thereto is open to traffic, but may not have yet been accepted into the State Secondary System of Highways for maintenance. Nothing herein shall override or contravene any subdivision monetary guarantee requirements for acceptance of public road improvements. M. The Applicant shall ensure that adequate sight distance is provided at the intersection of Ruebuck Lane and Rest Church Road, as generally depicted on the Transportation Plan element of the GDP. N. The Applicant shall coordinate with its contractors, subcontractors, sub- subcontractors, and any other consultants, hirees, or other personnel to arrange for the delivery of any goods, materials, or equipment to be used for the development of any use the Property. Deliveries of such goods, materials, or equipment to be used in the development of any use on the Property shall not be conducted during hours of peak traffic for the surrounding roadway network (“peak hours”). Such peak hours shall be defined as between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. for the morning weekday peak hour, and between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. for the evening weekday peak hour, from Monday through Friday of a given week. All deliveries for such goods, materials, or equipment shall take place outside of these 74 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 15 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 hours, if taking place from Monday through Friday. All construction work on the Property external to each building shall take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction work external to each building to take place on the Sunday of a given week, or on the specific holidays listed in Proffer 2(D). O. The Applicant shall construct, or cause to be constructed, any necessary traffic improvements required to support its on-site construction activities. Such improvements shall be determined at time of site plan. 4. SIGNAGE The Applicant shall be limited to a single monument sign for the TM portion of the Property at its entrance along Rest Church Road, conforming to the applicable provisions of § 165-201.06 of the Zoning Ordinance, as shown on the GDP; provided that this shall not preclude each owner or tenant of a building from installing signs, internal to the site, conforming to the provisions of § 165-201.06 (G) and (H) of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. LIGHTING All outdoor lighting shall be compatible, and harmonious throughout the Property. Fixtures shall be similar in style. Lighting shall be mounted at a height that is relative to the property line such that it is no taller than its horizontal distance from the nearest property line, but in no case shall it be placed more than 25’ above grade. Any lighting fixtures situated within 50’ of any property line shall be oriented perpendicular to and faced away from that property line so as not to cause trespass onto an adjacent property in excess of 0.1 footcandles onto a residential use, or 0.5 footcandles onto any other property. All lighting fixtures shall meet an up-light rating of U0 (that is zero up-light) according to the Luminaire Classification System (“LCS”), as developed and maintained by the Illuminating Engineering Society (“IES”). They shall be oriented with the central beam pointed straight down, and shall otherwise conform to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a photometric plan as part of the MDP and/or final site plan process demonstrating the minimization of off-site lighting impacts. 75 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 16 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 6. FIRE AND RESCUE The Applicant shall contribute to the County the sum of $150.00 per 1,000 gross square feet of constructed building as depicted on each final site plan, to be used for fire and rescue purposes. The contribution shall be made at the time of issuance of the certificate of occupancy for each structure built on the Property. 7. WATER AND SEWER A. The Property shall be served with public water and public sewer. At its expense, the Applicant shall design and construct all on-site and off-site improvements necessary, to include the acquisition of any required off-site easements, to provide service for the demand generated by development on the Property in accordance with applicable Frederick County Sanitation Authority (“Frederick Water”), Frederick County, and Virginia laws, ordinances, and regulations. B. The Applicant shall be limited to a maximum consumptive potable water usage of one hundred and twenty thousand (120,000) gallons per day. This limitation shall be measured through the use of the Monthly Average Gallons Per Day (MAGPD) standard. Such limitation shall be measured by Frederick Water, and shall be averaged by dividing the consumption of water in a billing period by the number of days in that given billing period. The Applicant shall coordinate with Frederick Water to install any and all equipment necessary to monitor and enforce this limitation and all collected data shall be provided to the Zoning Administrator of Frederick County upon request. C. The Applicant will install, at its expense, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (“SCADA”) systems as approved by Frederick Water at the Woodbine and VDOT pump stations to enable them to be monitored and pumps cycled on- off in an efficient manner, to accommodate the flows generated by the development. 76 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 17 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 D. The Applicant will grant the necessary easements at no cost to the County or Frederick Water to facilitate the north-south flow of water, the location of which easements shall generally follow the eastern property lines of the Property, with the purpose of ultimately extending to Cedar Hill and Hopewell Roads. The location of these easements will be established as part of the site plan process. E. The Applicant shall design and construct any computer or mechanical equipment systems installed on the Property that require temperature regulation and cooling to minimize the need for Frederick Water consumptive potable water use to the greatest extent feasible. These potable water use minimization strategies may include but not be limited to the following: Closed Loop Systems: Equipment cooling systems that recirculate water and/or cooling fluids within the computer or mechanical equipment systems reducing evaporation and overall water consumption. Air-Cooled Systems: Equipment cooling systems that use ambient air and heat exchangers to dissipate heat, greatly reducing the need for water. Direct Liquid Cooling: Equipment cooling systems that transfer heat directly from any computer or mechanical equipment systems to a recirculating water loop, minimizing the need for air conditioning and evaporative cooling. Immersion Cooling: Equipment cooling systems that incorporate immersion of heat-producing computer or mechanical equipment in a non-conductive dielectric fluid environment that can absorb heat directly and reduce the need for evaporative cooling. F. In the event any closed loop, direct liquid, or immersion cooling systems are used, any and all discharges or disposal of cooling fluids shall be done in full conformance with all applicable Frederick Water, federal and Virginia state regulations. The Applicant shall, at its sole cost, construct and maintain any on- site pre-treatment facilities for all such discharge water and cooling fluids in accordance with any and all requirements of Frederick Water or as mandated by 77 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 18 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 federal or Virginia environmental regulations prior to being released into any sanitary sewer facilities. If requested by Frederick Water or the Frederick- Winchester Service Authority, the Applicant shall, at its sole cost, transport any pre-treated discharge water and cooling fluids to the Opequon Water Reclamation Facility for secondary pre-treatment at that facility prior to being subjected to standard wastewater protocols. G. No groundwater resources via private on-site wells shall be used for any use on the Property. The Applicant shall install monitoring wells on the Property solely for the purpose of monitoring for impacts caused by the development of the Property. Upon completion of the development of the Property, which shall be defined as the issuance of the last Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant shall abandon, or cause to be abandoned, any such installed monitoring wells located on the Property. H. The Applicant shall, with the written permission of the adjoining property owners, install monitoring wells to measure and collect data on only groundwater levels as they exist before and during construction activities on the Property and after all construction is completed. In the event that no adjoining property owner provides such written permission, the Applicant shall install monitoring wells near adjoining property lines to monitor these groundwater levels. In the event that development activities on the Property causes damage to the wells on the adjacent properties, the Applicant shall, at its own expense, fund the drilling of replacement wells on these adjoining properties. 8. CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION AND PRESERVATION The Applicant shall conduct, or cause to be conducted, an Architectural Resources Study of the Property prior to the approval of the first MDP for the Property. A Phase II Architectural Resources Study will be conducted to examine further the interiors and building materials in the Lewis-Solenberger and Cather Houses. The Applicant shall have its archeological consultant present during the demolition of the Lewis-Solenberger and Cather Houses, and such consultant shall perform a visual assessment of any items of potential archeological value during the demolition. 78 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 19 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 In addition, the Applicant shall conduct, or shall cause to be conducted, an archeological assessment of the Property. Such assessment shall be conducted to assess the potential for intact archeological deposits on the Property. Such assessment shall include an archival study, which shall include a complete listing and discussion of previously-recorded historic properties located within and in the vicinity of the Property. Such assessment shall include a historic map review of the Property, to better understand the development and use of the site and its role in the County, to provide a basis for interpreting previously recorded historic properties. Such assessment shall define potential locations within the Property where archeological resources are present, or are likely to be present. Such assessment will pay particular attention to past land use activity, types of development, past disturbances, and potential for intact archeological deposits to be present. 9. SUPPORT FOR EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND SCHOLARSHIPS AT LAUREL RIDGE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, MIDDLETOWN CAMPUS In order to provide financial support for the development and expansion of educational programs and scholarships in advanced technology, electronic and computer information storage, and related fields, the Applicant shall, within thirty (30) days of the approval for the first site plan, create and fund an endowment at Laurel Ridge Community College, Middletown Campus with a minimum cash contribution of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00), to be used by Laurel Ridge Community College, Middletown Campus for the enhancement of the Cloud Infrastructure Program. Following this contribution, the Applicant shall provide a receipt from Laurel Ridge Community College documenting completion of this commitment to the Zoning Administrator. Following this initial contribution, the Applicant may increase its financial commitment to this established endowment at any time. 10. CPI ESCALATOR In the event the monetary contributions set forth in these Proffers are paid to the County within twelve (12) months after the date this rezoning application is approved by the Board, these contributions shall be in the amounts as stated herein. 79 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 20 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 Thereafter, any monetary contributions set forth in these Proffers that are to be paid to the County shall be adjusted in accordance with the Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI-U), published by the United States Department of Labor, such that at the time contributions are paid they shall be adjusted by the percentage change in the CPI-U from the date this rezoning application is approved by the Board to the date on which any monetary contribution is tendered. [Signature Pages Follow on Subsequent Pages] 80 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 21 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 APPLICANT/CONTRACT PURCHASER: Executive Land Holdings IV, LLC By: _______________________ Name: _______________________ Title: _______________________ Commonwealth of _____________________: County of : The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___________________ (date) by _________________________________ (name of officer or agent) _____________________________ (title of officer or agent) of Executive Land Holdings IV, LLC, a ____________________________ (state or place of incorporation), on behalf of the limited liability company. ______________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires:___________________________ My Notary Registration Number:_____________________ 81 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 22 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 OWNER: DTS LC By: _______________________ Name: _______________________ Title: _______________________ Commonwealth of _____________________: County of ______________________: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___________________ (date) by _________________________________ (name of officer or agent) _____________________________ (title of officer or agent) of DTS, LC, a ____________________________ (state or place of incorporation), on behalf of the limited liability company. ______________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires:___________________________ My Notary Registration Number:_____________________ 82 PROFFER STATEMENT VIRGINIA TECHOLOGY PARK REZONING STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT +/- 220.06 Acres Page 23 of 23 5086769v2 / 6260-16 OWNER: William O. Minor _________________________________ Commonwealth of _____________________: County of : Subscribed and sworn to before me this ____ day of ________________, 20_______ in my County and Commonwealth aforesaid, by the aforenamed principal. ______________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires: ___________________________ My Notary Registration Number: _____________________ 83 W W W.P O L Y S O N I C S.C O M PH O N E: 5 4 0 . 3 4 1 . 4 9 8 8 5 5 5 HO S P I T A L D R I V E WA R R E N T O N, V A 2 0 1 8 6 February 3, 2026 John L. Knott III Equus Capital Partners, LTD 3843 West Chester Pike Newtown Square, PA 19073 Project: Fruit Hill Dear Mr. Knott, The primary purpose of this report is to summarize the ambient noise measurements that Polysonics made at the proposed Fruit Hill site. From roughly 12:00 PM on Wednesday, January 21, 2026 to roughly 12:00 PM on Friday, January 23, Polysonics performed acoustic measurements at multiple locations throughout the Fruit Hill site. The results of these measurements are described herein. Please let us know if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Polysonics Rob Miller Principal, Acoustics Stephen P. Rittmueller Chief Scientist, Acoustics Morteza Karimi Acoustical Consultant Abbie Granahan Acoustical Consultant 84 W W W.P O L Y S O N I C S.C O M PH O N E: 5 4 0 . 3 4 1 . 4 9 8 8 5 5 5 HO S P I T A L D R I V E WA R R E N T O N, V A 2 0 1 8 6 AMBIENT NOISE SUMMARY: FRUIT HILL PROJECT REPORT #6334 PREPARED FOR: EQUUS CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC FEBRUARY 3, 2026 85 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 3 OF 21 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report summarizes the ambient noise measurements that Polysonics performed at the Fruit Hill site. The proposed new use for this site is as a Data Center and the developer was asked to quantify the existing ambient noise levels as part of the zoning approval process. The site is adjacent to Interstate 81, about one half mile southwest of the border between Virginia and West Virginia, near the unincorporated farming community of Clear Brook, Virginia, in Frederick County, VA. A thorough description of the measured data is provided herein; however, a robust summary of the ambient noise on the site can be seen in Figure 3. OVERVIEW From roughly 12:00 PM on Wednesday, January 21, 2026 to roughly 12:00 PM on Friday, January 23, Polysonics performed acoustic measurements at multiple locations throughout the Fruit Hill site. The data from these measurements has been reviewed and analyzed for suitability. Polysonics decided to exclude some measured data from consideration due to high winds reported during the measurement. Aside from the known period of high winds, the data appears to be accurate and free from unwanted interference from anomalous sound sources. An “anomalous” sound source would simply be sound from something not normally present at the site. A time of moderately increased noise levels was observed throughout much of the site circa midnight on 23 Jan. The data from meter #6 shows this most clearly but the data from several other meters also shows this characteristic. As these measurements were unattended, Polysonics cannot identify the source of these higher sound levels, but it appears to be most prevalent along the side of the site closest to the interstate. With lower speed winds and no precipitation observed at this time, Polysonics ascribes this noise to human activity and believes it reasonable to assume this noise is typical for this site. THE MEASUREMENTS Meter Locations Working in conjunction with the developer and the Authority Having Jurisdiction’s acoustics consultant, Polysonics proposed the ten locations identified in Figure 1 as measurement locations. It should be understood that the location of the new structures associated with the data center shown in Figure 1 are preliminary and are shown for reference only. Weather Conditions and Data Cleaning Measurements were performed from roughly 12:00 PM on Wednesday, 21 January 2026, to roughly 12:00 PM on Friday, 23 January 2026. Best practices for outdoor ambient noise measurements are to exclude measurements made when the wind is over 10 mph whenever possible. Observed weather for the nearby area of Clear Brook, Virginia, shows that wind over 10 mph was observed for most of the afternoon and evening of 21 January, extending into the morning of 22 January; please see Figure 2. Polysonics, therefore, excluded all measured data taken before 6:00 AM on Thursday, 22 January 2026 from the 86 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 4 OF 21 Figure 1: Proposed Meter Locations Figure 2: Observed Weather During Measurements for Clear Brook, Virginia 87 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 5 OF 21 analysis; the data analyzed for all meter locations starts at 6:00 AM on 22 Jan, sharp. There were winds of 11 mph observed between noon and 6:00 PM on 22 Jan; a visual examination of the measured data indicates that these wind speeds did not negatively impact the measurements. The ground was in normal condition for the time of year (damp in spots, no snow cover). Measurement Results Measured results are summarized on an image of the site in Figure 3. The results in tabular form can be seen in Table 1 and the results in graphical form can be seen in Figures 4 – 23. Photographs of the meters themselves can be seen in Figures 24-33. The LEQ, ALL metric represents the equivalent A-Weighted sound pressure level for the entire analyzed dataset. The LEQ, MAX metric represents the single highest A-Weighted measurement made – note that for meters #7, #8 and #8, the measurement period was one minute so this LEQ, MAX metric will be inherently lower for these sets of data. The statistical metrics, L1 – L99, represent percentile sound levels where, for the given datasets, the measured LEQ (dBA) level is exceeded X% of the time. For example, the L1 represents a level that is expected to be exceeded 1% of the time, L10 represents a level that is expected to be exceeded 10 % of the time, and so on. The L90 level is understood to represent the steady state background noise level for the dataset, i.e., when the influence from nearby sound sources is understood to be at a minimum. Table 1: Tabular Summary of Measured Results Meas.LocationAnalysis Period(Num Days)Meas. Period(Sec)LEQ, All(dBA)LEQ, Max(dBA)L1(dBA)L5(dBA)L10(dBA)L33(dBA)L50(dBA)L66(dBA)L90(dBA)L99(dBA)Meter #1 1.082 1 63.7 98.8 71.9 68.8 67.1 61.5 57.7 55.5 53.0 49.4Meter #2 1.177 1 57.1 81.3 65.6 63.0 61.4 55.9 52.9 50.1 46.2 43.4Meter #3 1.185 1 66.5 103.4 75.6 71.5 68.8 64.1 62.9 61.1 58.055.5Meter #4 1.197 1 51.1 85.4 60.8 56.2 53.9 47.2 43.6 39.7 34.8 29.7Meter #5 1.204 1 41.3 67.1 50.1 46.5 45.0 39.0 35.8 33.7 30.9 27.7Meter #6 1.210 1 51.9 76.1 61.3 57.8 55.6 49.8 47.9 46.1 43.4 40.8Meter #7 1.220 60 46.9 59.6 53.7 51.5 50.1 46.8 45.2 43.4 40.637.7Meter #8 1.244 60 41.3 59.0 49.5 46.1 44.6 40.8 38.8 36.5 33.129.8Meter #9 1.236 60 41.2 58.8 49.8 45.9 44.3 40.6 38.3 36.2 32.728.7Meter #10 1.230 1 44.9 77.3 50.4 47.2 45.8 42.6 41.0 39.3 36.733.888 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 6 OF 21 Figure 3: Measurement Locations with Measurement Results Summary 89 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 7 OF 21 APPENDIX 90 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 8 OF 21 Figure 4. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #1 Figure 5. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #1 91 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 9 OF 21 Figure 6. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #2 Figure 7. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #2 92 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 10 OF 21 Figure 8. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #3 Figure 9. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #3 93 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 11 OF 21 Figure 10. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #4 Figure 11. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #4 94 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 12 OF 21 Figure 12. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #5 Figure 13. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #5 95 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 13 OF 21 Figure 14. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #6 Figure 15. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #6 96 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 14 OF 21 Figure 16. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #7 Figure 17. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #7 97 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 15 OF 21 Figure 18. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #8 Figure 19. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #8 98 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 16 OF 21 Figure 20. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #9 Figure 21. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #9 99 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 17 OF 21 Figure 22. Sound Level vs Time for Meter #10 Figure 23. Histogram of Sound Level Data for Meter #10 100 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 18 OF 21 Figure 24: Image of Meter #1 Figure 25: Image of Meter #2 Figure 26: Image of Meter #3 Figure 27: Image of Meter #4 101 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 19 OF 21 Figure 28: Image of Meter #5 Figure 29: Image of Meter #6 Figure 30: Image of Meter #7 Figure 31: Image of Meter #8 102 POLYSONICS AMBIENT NOISE ANALYSIS FEBRUARY 03, 2026 FRUIT HILL PROJECT – REPORT #6334 PAGE 20 OF 21 Figure 32: Image of Meter #9 Figure 33: Image of Meter #10 103 104 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 1 OF 16 May 19, 2026 Equus Capital Partners, LTD 3843 West Chester Pike Newtown Square, PA 19073 Attn: John L. Knott VA Technology Center Modified Concept B: An Acoustic Evaluation Summary Polysonics has been tasked with providing a hypothetical radiated noise contour plot for a possible configuration of a data center on a site in Frederick County, VA, known as VA Technology Center. Polysonics has previously analyzed “Concept A” and “Concept B”. This updated analysis modifies the equipment models, sizes and counts and has been called “Modified Concept B” by Polysonics. Per the April 9, 2025, Zoning Ordinance for Frederick County, VA, sound pressure produced by a data center must not exceed a sound pressure level of 70 dB (A-Weighted, dB re 20 µPa) at the property line. This analysis shows that the listed equipment with the currently proposed acoustical mitigation techniques are expected to enable a data center in this location to meet local radiated noise code. Data and Discussion Polysonics has prepared radiated noise contour plots for two different situations of a possible data center on a site in Frederick County, VA, known as VA Technology Center Layout Concept B, based on details provided by Equus Capital Partners. Please see Figure 1 for details of this Layout Concept B. Please see Figures 2 and 3 for further site layout guidance as provided by Equus to Polysonics, including the equipment count for all buildings. The chillers and “mega-packs” (battery backup with cooling fans) were distributed evenly across the roofs and the generators were distributed evenly across the land adjacent to each structure in configurations typical of data centers that Polysonics has previously analyzed. Polysonics would like to note that the physical location of these devices are impacted by many – often conflicting – concerns, only one of which is acoustics. The heat transfer environment surrounding this equipment is critical to its proper operation and the more obvious strength of the structure below will also impact the positions of these devices. Rooftop barriers were positioned at least 2 ft. away from all rooftop units and fully encircled the rooftop gear. While the site layout is critical to these radiated noise analyses, the most critical aspect of these analysis can be considered the radiated sound power of the devices themselves. There are 3 primary types of 105 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 2 OF 16 machines that make noise on sites like this: the air-cooled chillers, the mega-packs and the generators. Polysonics has analyzed this site using the Multistack ACF662M air-cooled magnetic bearing chiller, a generic mega-packs battery backup and the Kohler KD2500 60 Hz Generator with the KD62V12A Engine and Level 2 Sound Mitigation package. For the latter, both walk-in and non-walk-in versions were modeled in case other emissions modifications were performed that make the walk-in version not viable. The sound power data for the Chillers and the mega-packs are shown in Table 1. The mega- packs analyzed utilized 6x W3G910LV1203 cooling fans that are the source of the radiated sound power. The mega-packs analyzed was fitted with a silencer to reduce the noise of these fans. The sound power used for the generator is shown in Table 2. Six situations have been analyzed including I-81 traffic noise modeled and calibrated to measurements performed earlier this year. Generators operation is varied between off, testing 50% nearest residences, and emergency 100% usage. It is understood that all generators will only be operational in emergency situations so this does represent a true worst case situation. Situation 1 • 60’ Building Height • 10’ Rooftop Barrier • Chillers ON • Mega-Pack ON • All Generators OFF • No Traffic Noise Situation 2 • 60’ Building Height • 10’ Rooftop Barrier • Chillers ON • Mega-Pack ON • All Generators ON (Walk-In) • No Traffic Noise Situation 3 • 60’ Building Height • 10’ Rooftop Barrier • Chillers ON • Mega-Pack ON • All Generators OFF • With Traffic Noise Situation 4 • 60’ Building Height • 10’ Rooftop Barrier • Chillers ON • Mega-Pack ON • All Generators ON (Walk-In) • With Traffic Noise Situation 5 • 60’ Building Height • 10’ Rooftop Barrier • Chillers ON • Mega-Pack ON • 50% Generators ON (Walk-In) • No Traffic Noise Situation 6 • 60’ Building Height • 10’ Rooftop Barrier • Chillers ON • Mega-Pack ON • 50% Generators ON (NOT Walk-In) • No Traffic Noise 106 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 3 OF 16 In all situations, the chillers and mega-packs are modeled to be at 8 ft relative to building height, approximately 2 ft below top of barrier wall to maximize mid-frequency noise attenuation while providing the anticipated airflow needed for the units. No additional barriers are included for generators beyond their enclosures. The traffic noise modeling included in the mapping represents the real sound pressure level experienced in any mapped area as measured by a sound level meter. The scenarios without traffic noise represent the contribution of noise to the environment by the facility itself, upon which compliance with the noise ordinance is to be determined. These plots demonstrate that the listed equipment with the currently employed acoustical mitigation techniques are expected to enable a data center at this location to meet local radiated noise code. Conclusions This analysis shows that Concept B, Situation 2, with all equipment operating simultaneously, would not produce sound levels in excess of 70 dBA at the property line, demonstrating compliance with local code. Situation 1 represents the anticipated steady operating state conditions outside generator testing hours and emergency events. Since this report represents a hypothetical design, an additional acoustical analysis of a completed engineering design will be necessary to demonstrate final compliance to local noise code. Please let us know if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Polysonics Rob Miller Principal, Acoustics Stephen P. Rittmueller Chief Scientist, Acoustics Morteza Karimi, Ph. D. Acoustical Consultant Abbie Granahan Acoustical Consultant 107 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 4 OF 16 APPENDIX 108 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 5 OF 16 Figure 1. VA Technology Center Overall Layout Modified Concept B 109 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 6 OF 16 Figure 2. Layout for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B Showing Machine Count (Southern Half) 110 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 7 OF 16 Figure 3. Layout for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B Showing Machine Count (Northern Half) 111 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 8 OF 16 Table 1. Radiated Sound Power for MEGA-PAC and Chiller (dB re 1 pW) Table 2. Radiated Sound Power for Level 2 Walk-In Generator (dB re 1 pW) Table 3. Radiated Sound Power for Level 2 NOT Walk-In Generator (dB re 1 pW) Sound Power (dB re 1pW) HVAC/Electric Gear 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Overall Multistack ACF662M 700-Ton MagLev Air-Cooled Chiller 106 102 98 96 94 93 90 90 108.6 MEGA-PAC 93 90 84 75 72 66 58 52 95.2 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 0 115.1 104.7 97.8 96.7 92.4 84.9 78.0 75.2 115.6 45 115.8 108.3 104.6 95.7 90.4 86.1 77.7 71.5 116.8 90 124.7 106.3 105.2 98.3 90.8 84.7 76.1 67.5 124.8 135 114.6 109.2 103.5 95.9 92.7 85.9 78.6 75.5 116.0 180 110.6 107.3 96.3 96.2 91.2 83.8 78.6 77.8 112.5 225 112.5 105.9 98.1 93.4 86.7 83.3 77.6 83.8 113.5 270 120.6 114.2 100.7 87.5 85.7 83.1 83.9 89.1 121.5 315 121.1 106.0 101.5 91.4 88.9 83.5 80.3 84.1 121.3 Sound Power, dB (Z) Measurement Position Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) Overall Power (dB) 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 0 112.6 108.0 104.7 99.0 93.2 88.4 80.7 76.5 114.5 45 110.7 117.5 105.0 97.8 89.4 88.1 79.8 76.3 118.5 90 110.4 113.3 99.2 92.6 86.3 79.8 73.0 68.9 115.2 135 106.6 117.5 102.4 97.1 90.3 87.7 80.3 77.9 118.0 180 109.5 107.1 103.5 99.8 92.6 87.9 83.6 79.7 112.4 225 107.5 108.8 106.4 100.1 91.7 85.9 81.4 76.6 112.7 270 110.1 108.0 106.2 100.0 91.5 84.0 78.3 69.2 113.4 315 109.7 107.1 107.7 99.7 92.8 87.4 81.2 75.8 113.3 Sound Power, dB (Z) Measurement Position Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) Overall Power (dB) 112 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 9 OF 16 Table 4. TNM Traffic Settings Veh/h (d)% Veh (d)Veh/h (n)% Veh (n)Veh/h (d)% Veh (d)Veh/h (n)% Veh (n) Automobiles 1323 73.8 551 73.8 Automobiles 920 73.8 383 73.7 Medium Trucks 37 2.1 16 2.1 Medium Trucks 26 2.1 11 2.1 Heavy Trucks 423 23.6 176 23.6 Heavy Trucks 294 23.6 123 23.7 Bus 10 0.6 4 0.5 Bus 7 0.6 3 0.6 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hourly Total 1793 100 747 100 Hourly Total 1247 100 520 100 ADT 33618 ADT 23385 Speed 70 Speed 70 Veh/d (d)% Veh (d)Veh/d (n)% Veh (n)Veh/d (d)% Veh (d)Veh/d (n)% Veh (n) Automobiles 1966 73.8 819 73.8 Automobiles 1367 73.8 569 73.7 Medium Trucks 55 2.1 24 2.1 Medium Trucks 39 2.1 16 2.1 Heavy Trucks 629 23.6 262 23.6 Heavy Trucks 437 23.6 183 23.7 Bus 15 0.6 6 0.5 Bus 10 0.6 4 0.6 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hourly Total 2664 100 1110 100 Hourly Total 1853 100 773 100 ADT 49955 ADT 34749 Speed 70 Speed 70 Veh/h (d)% Veh (d)Veh/h (n)% Veh (n)Veh/h (d)% Veh (d)Veh/h (n)% Veh (n) Automobiles 185 74.0 77 73.3 Automobiles 185 74.0 77 73.3 Medium Trucks 5 2.0 2 1.9 Medium Trucks 5 2.0 2 1.9 Heavy Trucks 59 23.6 25 23.8 Heavy Trucks 59 23.6 25 23.8 Bus 1 0.4 1 1.0 Bus 1 0.4 1 1.0 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hourly Total 250 100 105 100 Hourly Total 250 100 105 100 ADT 4695 ADT 4695 Speed 45 Speed 45 Veh/d (d)% Veh (d)Veh/d (n)% Veh (n)Veh/d (d)% Veh (d)Veh/d (n)% Veh (n) Automobiles 275 74.0 114 73.3 Automobiles 275 74.0 114 73.3 Medium Trucks 7 2.0 3 1.9 Medium Trucks 7 2.0 3 1.9 Heavy Trucks 88 23.6 37 23.8 Heavy Trucks 88 23.6 37 23.8 Bus 1 0.4 1 1.0 Bus 1 0.4 1 1.0 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Motor Cycles 0 0.0 0 0.0 Hourly Total 371 100 156 100 Hourly Total 371 100 156 100 ADT 6977 ADT 6977 Speed 45 Speed 45 2046 2046 2% Annual Increase 2% Annual Increase 2046 2046 I-81 S (Near) 2026 I-81 N (Far) 2026 I-81 S (Near)I-81 N (Far) 2% Annual Increase 2% Annual Increase I-81 S Ramp (Near)I-81 N Ramp (Far) 2026 2026 I-81 S Ramp (Near)I-81 N Ramp (Far) 113 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 10 OF 16 Figure 4. Noise Contour for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B, Situation 1 114 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 11 OF 16 Figure 5. Noise Contour for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B, Situation 2 115 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 12 OF 16 Figure 6. Noise Contour for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B, Situation 3 116 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 13 OF 16 Figure 7. Noise Contour for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B, Situation 4 117 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 14 OF 16 Figure 8. Noise Contour for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B, Situation 5 118 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 15 OF 16 Figure 9. Noise Contour for VA Technology Center Modified Concept B, Situation 6 119 POLYSONICS ACOUSTIC EVALUATION 19 MAY 2026 VA TECHNOLOGY CENTER DATA CENTER: MODIFIED CONCEPT B PAGE 16 OF 16 Figure 10. Active Generators for 50% Generators (Situations 5 & 6) 120 PUMP A R UN N IN G HIGH FU E L L EV E LSERIES 4 00 D AY T AN K CO NT RO L LE R FUEL IN BA S IN LOW FUE L L E VE L CRITICAL L OW F UE L LE V EL POWER A V A IL A BL E REV. PU M P R UN PUMP B R UN N IN G ALARM S T AT U S PUMP ST A TU S APPROVAL:____________________ DATE:______________121 This institution is an equal opportunity provider and employer. SVEC supports our armed services and veterans in employment opportunities. Corporate Office 180 Oakwood Drive Rockingham, VA 22801 (800) 234-7832 May 15, 2026 To: Frederick County Board of Supervisors, Frederick County Planning Commission members From: Jason Carter, Vice-President & Chief Relations Officer, Shenandoah Valley Electric Cooperative Re: Prospective electrical infrastructure and large load service in Frederick County I am writing to you to clear up some misinformation appearing in the May 8, 2026, edition of the Winchester Star article entitled Planners grill developers of proposed data center campus in Clear Brook, authored by reporter Jack Parry, and assure that all of you are informed equally in light of this article. First, in relation to the unsubstantiated Bloomberg News correlation between a recent increase in wholesale power costs and the presence of data centers. Effective May 1, 2026, the rate increase reflected on SVEC members’ bills will average $17 per month for residential consumers - $6 to cover increase in SVEC variable distribution costs (system O&M) and $11 for generation fuel recovery costs associated with an unplanned natural gas price increase of up to 6000% during Winter Storm Fran. These are in no way related to current or anticipated large electric loads in the Shenandoah Valley. In relation to the claim Equus was assured by SVEC that no residential member would see an increase in the cost of electricity due to their projects – SVEC has clearly stated numerous times that large loads are treated as a separate consumer class with an associated tariff that will isolate all other member classes from the infrastructure and service capacity requirements they may have. SVEC is acutely aware of the risks associated with large load location and operations and has taken steps to insulate its members from that risk. In October 2025, SVEC filed a new tariff rate with the VASCC for service to large loads. This rate – Schedule LPD-2 Large Power Dedicated Facilities Contract Service or LPD-2 – provides terms and conditions of service that insulate and protect the rest of our members from the outsize costs for service by requiring the large load user to fully pay for all facilities required. Further, these large loads will be required to purchase electricity entirely separate from the rest of the cooperative’s needs to ensure there is no impact on the distribution rates of our thousands of other members. This is documented and approved by the SCC. It is clear. In relation to the claim made in the article that SVEC will pay for three substations required by the Equus project – this is patently false. Again, – Schedule LPD-2 – provides terms and conditions of service that insulate and protect the rest of our members from the outsize costs for service by requiring the large load user to fully pay for all facilities required. Furthermore, the LPD-2 Tariff also states that the Large Load Consumer “must provide collateral in an amount and form acceptable to SVEC based upon the creditworthiness of the Consumer consistent with the Cooperative’s Terms and Conditions for Providing Electric Distribution Service”. This will 122 This institution is an equal opportunity provider and employer. SVEC supports our armed services and veterans in employment opportunities. Corporate Office 180 Oakwood Drive Rockingham, VA 22801 (800) 234-7832 further insulate the rest of SVEC’s membership by mitigating the financial risk posed by large load operations. SVEC is a Virginia State Corporation Commission regulated electric distribution utility that has legal and regulatory requirements to provide electric service to all who request electric service within our franchise territory and cannot discriminate because of size or end use. SVEC does not own or have any influence on the transmission entities to whom the cooperative must connect to receive the power to distribute to its members. SVEC also purchases its power through its wholesale cooperative generation supplier, Old Dominion Electric Cooperative (ODEC). Consequently, the transmission and generation costs are reflected as pass through charges on each members’ bill and through distinct consumer classes to avoid cross-subsidization. I am sharing all of this with you with respect to the relationship we have with the people living in and elected to represent those communities. While much of this has been shared with Fredrick County staff and is publicly available at the State Corporation Commission for review, I felt it necessary to reiterate this with you in writing for assurance you all have an appropriate understanding. SVEC is in our 90th year of service in the Shenandoah Valley of providing safe, reliable electricity distribution at the best possible value. The service aspects have changed greatly over the years as the communities of the Shenandoah Valley have grown and differentiated in their economies and expectations. SVEC remains ready to continue service to every person, business or entity living, operating or permitted in Frederick County and every other locality in our territory. Sincerely, Cc: Andrew Fox Wyatt Pearson 123 2024 Annual Report 124 To our members, In 1936, Shenandoah Valley Electric Cooperative became the first electric cooperative chartered in Virginia. Our operational and community impact in the decades that have followed has enriched and literally powered lives and businesses, not just contributing to but directly leading the Valley to the attractive place we all enjoy calling home. This report is but a snapshot of one year of our work to provide an essential service to thousands of our friends, families and neighbors. As leaders across the Valley plan for economic and workforce development and general growth, we will be engaged in the conversations, carrying forward the best interests of the legacy that continues to drive us: you, our members. At the end of the day, we recognize you want your lights to come on every time you flip the switch. And you want the cost of turning on those lights to be as affordable as possible. As a not-for-profit cooperative, we’re right there with — and for — you. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Jerry Dofflemyer Board Chair Central Region Todd Van Horn Vice Chair Frederick/Clarke counties Brent H. Arbogast Secretary/Treasurer Southern Region Dr. Conrad A. Helsley Shenandoah/Warren counties Larry C. Howdyshell Augusta/Highland counties Robbie F. Marchant City of Winchester Suzanne S. Obenshain Rockingham County William A. Orndoff Northern Region Brian K. Plum Page County Stephen W. Burkholder Emeritus Director Rockingham County Sincerely, Shenandoah Valley Electric Cooperative 125 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 Electric Plant $722,394,770 $684,369,547 $650,676,110 $627,792,077 $609,568,869 Operating Revenues $294,572,833 $285,422,482 $270,638,899 $231,069,112 $233,293,893 Cost of Power $195,299,488 $199,582,842 $184,317,504 $151,185,803 $154,579,823 Net Margins $19,129,322 $15,392,987 $13,860,596 $16,137,736 $10,800,055 Equity Ratio (equity/total assets)36.53%36.31%34.14%35.71%35.97% Interest on Long-Term Debt $11,559,897 $11,735,869 $11,462,492 $10,532,946 $10,099,874 Interest Coverage (TIER)2.65 2.31 2.21 2.53 2.07 Capital Credits Retired $4,975,642 $4,705,540 $7,331,451 $6,386,062 $4,701,337 FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON * You can find SVEC’s 2024 financial audit in its entirety at svec.coop/audit. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA Participation in Operation Round Up grew by 19%, with 5,898 members participating at the end of 2024. 39 nonprofit organizations in our service territory were awarded a total of $75,000 in grants. More than $4.9 million was returned to members through capital credits. $10,000 in scholarship money was awarded to students in our service territory. 126 83,677 MEMBERS 13 AVG. SERVICES PER MILE 8,005 MILES OF POWER LINES 2.95 AVERAGE OUTAGES PER MEMBER 8 HOURS AVG. TOTAL OUTAGE TIME PER MEMBER 99.9% SERVICE RELIABILITY COMPARED TO AN AVG. 34 PER MILE FOR INVESTOR-OWNED UTILTIIES 127 13.81¢/kWh AVG. RESIDENTIAL RATE OVER 2.3 BILLION kWh SOLD 109,735 POLES45 SUBSTATIONS & SWITCHYARDS 76,921 PHONE CALLS ANSWERED 104,441 METERS IN SERVICE 128 1-800-234-7832 • 180 Oakwood Dr, Rockingham, VA 22801 • svec.coop We will provide reliable and safe electric service at the best possible value within our communities, consistent with sound management and cooperative principles. We will continually evaluate our members’ needs and work to exceed their expectations, pursuing opportunities that will benefit them. Our Mission 129 PREPARED BY Chris Lloyd Senior Vice President PREPARED FOR Equus Capital Partners, Ltd. Frederick County, VA Data Center Development Report 130 I. Executive Summary Equus Capital Partners, Ltd. (“Equus” or “Applicant”), is a leading private real estate investment fund manager with a 40+ year history of managing a high-quality investment portfolio, through its vertically integrated operating platform, in top tier markets throughout the United States. In the greater Winchester area, Equus has developed over 22.1 million square feet of logistics/industrial space – much of which supports local manufacturing operations – and currently owns and operates over 1.2 million square feet of industrial facilities in the Stonewall Industrial Park, the Graystone Industrial Park and Shady Elm/Apple Valley industrial area. Building on its national development expertise and extensive industry contacts, the Applicant is proposing to develop land totaling approximately 240 acres in northern Frederick County as a top-tier data center campus. Previously proposed as an industrial park, the data center campus will support the creation of high wage jobs with minimal traffic or other adverse impacts on the community. It is anticipated that the project will house a multi-building data center campus used by multiple colocation entities or a single hyperscale user. Data center facilities are especially capital intensive, not only because of the complex electrical and mechanical systems necessary for the operation of the facility, but the servers which house the client data and provide services cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Further, given technology advances, these servers become obsolete very quickly and are thus subject to a frequent refresh cycle – often 4-6 years – where much of the old equipment is replaced by newer equipment. A capital-intensive operation results in significant property taxes for the host community, supporting education, public safety, and other essential public services. In addition, the jobs generated through the operation of the facility provide additional benefits to the community because of the income taxes paid by employees and the sales taxes levied on the purchases made from their wages. These additional benefits can be substantial for a project of the magnitude being considered by the Applicant. As part of the due diligence related to the permitting of the potential data center facilities, the Applicant was asked to provide estimates of the local tax revenue that could be generated through this development. The Applicant and their team of consultants partnered with McGuireWoods Consulting, one of the largest public affairs operations in the country with significant data center experience, to assist with modeling the fiscal impacts of the project. The estimate of that revenue showed that the total tax revenue that the proposed project could generate for Frederick County approaches $237 million over 20 years. 2 131 In addition to the direct property taxes that could be generated by the project, the additional jobs created to run the data center – likely 440 jobs with an average starting salary above $75,000 – will also bring net fiscal benefits to the state and Frederick County. The project will inject over $311 million in wage income into the regional economy over 20 years, adding $41 million to state tax coffers and $2.5 million in local sales tax revenues. II. About McGuireWoods Consulting McGuireWoods Consulting, LLC was formed in 1998 and is the public affairs subsidiary of the McGuireWoods law firm based in Richmond, Virginia. Among the original divisions of McGuireWoods Consulting (MWC) was a team specifically dedicated to site selection and economic development activities, known as the Infrastructure and Economic Development team. That team, which now consists of eight members, has deep state and local economic development experience which has been leveraged to represent hundreds of private sector clients in evaluating various locations for corporate expansion and relocation projects. Among the services provided to MWC’s economic development clients are a thorough analysis of the incentives opportunities available which are tied to new job creation and capital investment activities. To support incentives negotiations with state and local economic development entities, the MWC team routinely performs a fiscal analysis to show the net benefits of a project to a community. It was this experience which was the foundation of the project evaluation. Being based in Virginia, home of the “Data Center Alley” in Loudoun County, the MWC team has had the opportunity to work on a variety of data center focused economic development projects for enterprise and multi-tenant co- location facilities around the country. Thus, our team knows and understands the many facets of data center development and economics. III. Our Team and Key Concepts A. About Equus Capital Partners, Ltd. (“Equus”) Equus develops and builds projects that represent the highest quality in the marketplace. By making connections and gaining a deep understanding of the local landscapes from which they serve, Equus is able to drive growth and prosperity for its investors, customers, team and the communities in which they work. 3 132 Led by a deep and experienced management group and backed by a team with a long track record of careful and timely execution, Equus and their affiliated development entities exemplify the highest level of quality through each of its projects and consistently resets market expectations. B. Definitions of Key Terms To better understand some of the concepts outlined in this report, the following glossary of key terms is provided. Building materials – The literal “sticks and bricks” to build the data center shell exclusive of the mechanical systems to support the servers. Colocation – A data center delivery practice where a developer designs and constructs the data center shell, along with all the supporting electrical and mechanical systems, but the actual servers are installed by third party tenants who place their equipment in the facility. These third parties rent space in the facility to house their equipment and the schedule for full development of the facility is dependent upon how fast the available space is rented. Hyperscaler – One of the large data center operators such as Google, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, or Meta. Mechanical Systems – Data centers require substantial mechanical systems to handle the power consumed by servers and other data center equipment and to cool the servers. Such mechanical systems are incorporated into the real property but are exempt from the state sales tax because of the essential role they play in supporting data center equipment. Multi-tenant data centers - Data centers operated by colocation companies for the benefit of multiple tenants. They are often referred to as colocation data centers. Real property – The land on which a data center is located and the shell that houses the equipment. Server – Computer equipment consisting of memory and processing semiconductor chips and cabling on which data is stored for access by users. Shell – The building that houses data center equipment. 4 133 IV. Key Project Assumptions Review A. Ramp up/Development Schedule and Assumptions We have built the fiscal model assuming a multi-tenant data center which rents space to third parties to house their server equipment while providing central services (operations, mechanical systems, cooling) for the entire facility. While there are a variety of factors which impact how fast a particular data center fills up, for the size of the facilities being contemplated by Equus, a 12-18 month development cycle is typical. If the data centers were occupied by either a colocation company or a hyperscaler, then the addition of equipment, and thus the fiscal impact, could materialize more quickly. For this proposed development, the team envisions the project developing in four phases over a four-year period. The installation of server equipment would also proceed along a four-year timeline, but to account for full build out, the schedule is slightly slower. The development plan would be as follows: Year Shells Built Shells Equipped 1 2 shells 2 fully equipped shells 2 2 additional shells 2 additional fully equipped shells 3 4 additional shells 2 additional fully equipped shells 4 3 final shells 5 final additional fully equipped shells We have made the following assumptions: • Each shell will consist of approximately 200,000-225,000 sf of server space. • Each shell is likely to have an assessed value of $50 million (growing slightly over time), of which building materials are $20 million. • Each “fully equipped shell” consists of approximately $260-300 million of server equipment. • Server equipment in a fully equipped shell will be completely replaced in the seventh year after the initial installation occurred. This would be a six-year replacement cycle. • Each shell would have 38-42 full time jobs with an average starting salary of approximately $75,000 that then increases 2.5% per year. • The average effective state income tax rate for these positions is 4%. • Of the income attributable to each employee, one third is spent on items subject to the state and local sales tax, with 4.3% going to the Commonwealth of Virginia and 1% attributable to employee spending in Frederick County. 5 134 To be especially conservative, we have not assumed: • Increases in server costs over the 20-year time horizon (3 refresh cycles). There is some counterbalance to the investment estimates since not all equipment will be replaced every 6 years (certain equipment are more long lived). • Indirect or induced impacts, though they typically double the amount of impact. B. Local Property Tax Rate Assumptions The real property for the project will be taxed at the same rate as all other real property in the county. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed the current tax rate of $0.48/$100 of assessed value over the 20-year estimate. Virginia law provides that localities can adopt a lower personal property tax rate on data center equipment than applies to other personal property in the county. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed the current data center equipment tax rate of $1.25/$100 of value over the 20-year estimate. V. Key Findings To highlight the scale and significance of the proposed development, the following figures summarize the projected local and state benefits over a 20-year period: This estimated fiscal impact resulting from data center development is significantly more than what other alternative uses would generate for the county. For example, a warehouse/distribution park at 2 million square feet at full development would likely generate about $800,000 per year. While the project may have more jobs, those positions would be at lower wages, so the income and sales tax impacts compared to a data center development, would also be less. VI. Variables that Could Impact Revenue As previously noted, the fiscal model relied on various financial and development timeline assumptions related to the construction of the project and deployment of the data center equipment. Those assumptions, however, could also be impacted by a variety of other site development and external factors that could slow or otherwise impact the fiscal forecast. 6 $237 Million Local Tax Revenue From taxes on real estate and equipment – funding schools, safety, and public services. 440 Jobs High-Wage Employment Permanent roles averaging $75K+ – expanding local high-wage skilled job opportunities. $311 Million Wage Impact Total employee income – boosting the local economy through spending, taxes, and community reinvestment. 135 Occupational Category Roles and Responsibilities Data Center Technician/Server Operations Technician Install, troubleshoot, repair, rack, cable, and decommission servers and network equipment. Critical Facilities/Engineering Operations Technician Operate the physical facility: cooling, fire and life safety, generators, uninterruptable power supplies, etc. Electrical/Power Systems Technician or Engineer Maintain electrical distribution, uninterrubptable power supplies, generators, switchgear, substations, and backup power systems. Mechanical/HVAC/Cooling Technician Maintain chillers, Computer Room Air Conditioning (CRAC) and Computer Room Air Handler (CRAH), pumps, piping, cooling towers, air/water systems, and mechanical infrastructure. Data Center Operations Manager/Site or Shift Manager Manage technicians, shift coverage, incident response, KPIs, staffing, vendors, maintenance windows, and daily operations. Network Deployment/Cabling/ Fiber Technician Install and troubleshoot fiber, copper, patch panels, swithces, network racks, and physical connectivity. Construction/Project Manager/ Delivery Manager Manage new builds, rack development, capacity delivery, vendor coordination, schedules, and construction execution. Commissioning Engineer/ Commissioning Technician Test and validate new facilities and systems before operations, electrical, mechanical, controls, integrated systems testing, and startup. Logistics/Inventory/Asset Technician Manage inbound/outbound equipment, parts asset tracking, spare inventory, warranty processes, and data-bearing-device handling. Security Manage access control, surveillance, badging, escorts, security operations, and physical site protection. Data Center Industry Occupations Data centers rely on a workforce that supports the operations, technical, logistics, and security requirements of a highly complex digital infrastructure facility operating reliably 24/7/365. While data centers are highly automated, people remain essential to keeping them reliable, secure, and responsive to customer needs. A. Data Center Occupational Categories and Responsibilities B. Data Center Shifts Data Centers often operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Each day typically includes three shifts. This staffing model helps ensure continuous monitoring, maintenance, and timely response to issues that impact uptime. C. Data Center Wages According the US Bureau of Labor Statistics the information technology industry average hourly earnings is $114,046, second only to the utilities industry. Nationally, the average annual wage for data center occupations is $92,987. The median wage is $85,265. Data center wages range from $42,890 - $187,990. For comparison purposes, a leading data center salary survey in 2025, which surveyed more than 1,500 data center employees, reported the average full time data center employee salary in the United States to be $180,951. By nearly all standards, the average wage of $72,500 that is being used to calculate economic impact for the proposed Frederick County, VA data center campus, represents an extremely conservative approach. There is a strong likelihood that actual wages will be significantly higher. 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Virginia Technology Park Rezoning Application RA to TM PIN’s: 33-(A)-89; 33-(A)-90; & 33-(9)-1A; Contract Purchaser/Applicant: Executive Land Holdings, IV, LLC April 6, 2026 Introduction: Executive Land Holdings, IV, LLC, dba Equus Capital Partners, Ltd. (hereinafter, the “Applicant”) is the contract purchaser of properties identified as Frederick County PINs 33-(A)-89; 33-(A)-90; and 33-(9)-1A (collectively, the “Property”) located on the west side of I-81 in the Clear Brook area of the Stonewall District. The Property consists of approximately 220.06 acres of contiguous land west of Zachary Ann Lane, south of Rest Church Road, and east of Ruebuck Lane. In this application, the Applicant seeks a rezoning of the Property from the RA zoning district to the TM zoning district with proffered commitments. The proposed development on the Property will be industrial and will be accessed by Technology Park Road, which will be constructed as part of the development of the Property. Proposed Uses: The proposed development on the Property will be for industrial uses as permitted in the TM – Technology Manufacturing Park zoning district. These uses may include an electrical substation to be built by electrical utilities providing service to the future development. The proposed uses conform with the land use recommendations contained withing the Northeast Land Use Plan (“NELUP”) element of the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant acknowledges that in addition to any proffered commitments, all uses on the Property must conform at all times to the performance standards contained within the Zoning Ordinance, including, but not limited to, the Data Center performance standards set forth in Section 165-204.41 of the Zoning Ordinance adopted on April 9, 2025. Suitability of Site: The Applicant has analyzed the following categories to address the suitability of this site for the proposed rezoning development, as requested by Frederick County: 145 1. 100 Year Floodplains: The Property contains approximately 31.54 acres of floodplain area that bisect the site as shown on the Generalized Development Plan. The proposed improvements have been oriented to minimize impacts to the floodplain area. Stormwater management areas have been placed adjacent to the floodplain areas due to the Property’s topography, which will be designed in accordance with Virginia DEQ requirements to minimize downstream impacts from the proposed improvements. 2. Wetlands and Streams: According to an environmental study of the site conducted by ECS Mid- Atlantic, LLC, titled “Waters of the U.S. Study: Fruit Hill Property,” dated November 23, 2021, two streams totaling 2,936-linear feet (also called Duncan Run) were identified and delineated within the study area, as shown on the Generalized Development Plan. The stream limits are generally located within the 100-Year Floodplain area, which the proposed improvements have been oriented to minimize impacts to. 3. Steep Slopes: Per the topographic survey prepared by GreyWolfe, Inc. and Frederick County GIS, there are no prolonged steep slopes on the parcels (over 15%). 4. Mature Woodlands: The subject parcels contain approximately 54 acres of woodlands. The Virginia Department of Forestry’s Forest Conservation Value model designates the bulk of the forested areas on the parcels as having only average conservation value and the remainder are not designated as having a meaningful conservation value. No portion of the parcels fall within an ecological core according to the Virginia National Landscape Assessment Map. 5. Prime Agricultural Soils: The majority of the parcels contain soils designated as “Oaklet” and “Frederick” on Frederick County GIS. These soils consist of: • Frederick Poplimento Loams • Oaklet Silt Loams • Carbo-Oaklet Silt Loams, very rocky According to the Virginia Agricultural Model map, these areas are labeled as prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance. 146 The parcels also contain Pagebrook Silty Clay Loam, which tracks the eastern portion of Duncan Run. There is also a narrow portion of Pagebrook Silt Loam which extends across the parcels further north. According to the Virginia Agricultural Model map, these areas are less suitable for agriculture. There is a minor stretch of Massanetta Loam that tracks the western portion of Duncan Run along with a few soil varieties with relatively minor intrusion along the exterior of the parcels. 6. Soil Conditions: No significant soil or bedrock conditions have been identified that would result in construction difficulties or hazards associated with the proposed development. Surrounding Properties: The surrounding properties to the south, west, and north of the Property include RA- Rural Agricultural zoned parcels that are currently used as residencies and/or farmland, with the planned NextEra substation lying south of the Property. Along the eastern border of the subject site are properties zones B-3 – Industrial Transition and M-1 – Light Industrial. The industrial uses in this area consist of the Flying J Travel Center and the Cat Machinery rental facility. Traffic Impact Analysis: A detailed Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Kittelson & Associates has been prepared and filed with this application and submitted for review by Frederick County and VDOT. The proposed industrial uses would occur in an area with a mature road network, and the Applicant has analyzed its potential impact on these roads. The Applicant proposes a number of actions that would align existing conditions with the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan while accommodating the limited traffic impacts associated with the proposed industrial uses. These improvements include relocating a portion of Zachary Ann Lane and construction of a new road, referred to in this application as Technology Park Road, which will connect to Rest Church Road and the nearby I-81 interchange. The Applicant’s Traffic Impact Analysis confirms that the road network can adequately support the development of the proposed Property with recommendations noted in that Analysis. Sewage Conveyance and Treatment: The Property lies with the Sewer and Water Service Area and the proposed development will be served by Frederick Water. The Applicant will work with 147 Frederick Water to plan, develop, and construct any needed connections to public sanitary sewer. The Applicant understands that Frederick Water’s engineering team has reviewed water and sewer lines currently serving the Zachary Ann Lane area to assess service capabilities. The area is served by an 8 -inch gravity sanitary sewer main conveying flows under Interstate-81. Sanitary sewer capacity is limited by downstream pump stations and force main constraints. The end users of the industrial development on the Property have not been identified, but it is anticipated that expansion of the existing sanitary sewer system will be required for full build-out of the proposed improvements on the Property. The Applicant will continue to work closely with Frederick Water to determine the phasing of the improvements and systems that will be required to adequately serve the Property. Water Supply: The Property lies with the Sewer and Water Service Area and the proposed development will be served by Frederick Water. The Applicant will work with Frederick Water to plan, develop, and construct any needed connections to public water. The Applicant understands that Frederick Water’s engineering team has reviewed water and sewer lines currently serving the Zachary Ann Lane area to assess service capabilities. The area is served by a single 12-inch water main conveying flows under Interstate-81. Two recent water pressure tests from fire hydrants on Zachary Ann Lane showed flows of 950 and 1,005 GPM, barely meeting Frederick Water’s minimal flow requirements. The end users of the industrial development on the Property have not been identified, but it is anticipated that expansion of the existing sanitary public water systems will be required for full build-out of the proposed improvements on the Property. The Applicant will continue to work closely with Frederick Water to determine the phasing of the improvements and systems that will be required to adequately serve the Property. At full buildout and once operational, the Applicant estimates that the proposed development will use no more than 20,000 to 30,000 gallons per building per day, or 200,000 to 300,000 gallons per day for the total site. This amount may fluctuate slightly based on seasonal weather that could impact water use, and the number of permanent employees staffing the proposed use. The estimated water use does not apply to the initial fill of a closed-loop cooling system, or the fill that may be required during the replacement and/or maintenance of a closed-loop system. 148 Drainage: The Applicant intends to maintain existing drainage divides with the proposed development. A stormwater management plan will be prepared with Site Plan drawings showing compliance with all federal, state, and local quality and quantity requirements. It is intended that a combination of proposed facilities a t existing low points on site and the purchase of nutrient credits will be used to meet the requirements. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: End users will be required to comply with federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding the disposal of solid waste. Electricity: As discussed above, the proposed use may include utility substations to be built by electrical utilities to service the proposed development. The Applicant has depicted the substations on its GDP. The anticipated voltage required to provide service to the proposed development is 900 MW, which shall be provided via 138 kV transmission lines from the proposed NextEra substation. The electricity will be provided to the substation generally via the anticipated routing path for transmission infrastructure. In support of this, the Applicant has requested an overhead utility waiver for transmission infrastructure between the NextEra substation and the proposed substation. Noise: The Applicant has conducted two sound studies of the Property to establish the baseline sound levels at the property line and to predict the impact that noise generated by the proposed use would have on the surrounding properties. Based on the projected noise impact to the surrounding properties, the Applicant has proffered to limit noise generation to 70 dBA at the eastern property line, where commercial uses are located, and where the ambient sound level is higher. The Applicant has also proffered to maintain a maximum noise level of 65 dBA at the western property line, where the Property abuts RA-zoned properties which are used for residential purposes. Historic Sites and Structures: Through a review and analysis of the Frederick County Rural Landmarks Survey Report, the Virginia Division of Historic Resources, and the State and National 149 Registers, the only historical resources located on the Property that have been previously identified are DHR #034-1464, consisting of the Cather House, listed as current, and the Payne House, listed as historic, and DHR #034-1463 consisting of the Carter, Josh house, listed as historic, and the Lewis-Solenberger house, listed as current. The Applicant has proffered to conduct an Architectural Resources Survey as a part of this rezoning. In the context of a previous rezoning application on the Property , the Applicant has met and worked with the Historic Resources Advisory Board to identify other concerns. The Applicant has agreed to an additional Phase II architectural study of the Lewis-Solenberger house and the Cather house located on the Property, and to conduct an archeological assessment of the Property. All discoveries will be reported to the County, and appropriate steps taken should consequential resources be discovered. Impact on Community Facilities: Educational Facilities: The proposed development is industrial and will not have any impacts on the Frederick County Public School system. The Applicant has proffered to contribute $200,000.00 to Laurel Ridge Community College’s Cloud Infrastructure Program, which will support the training and education of workers needed to support the proposed industrial uses and create a positive impact on the higher education system of Frederick County. Emergency Services: The Frederick County Sheriff Department will provide police protection. The property is in Grid 1304 of the First Due Boundary for the Clear Brook Fire and Rescue Station. Therefore, response times from the station to the site are reasonable. Parks and Recreation: The proposed development is industrial and will not have any impacts on or increased demand for Parks and Recreation services. Solid Waste: Large amounts of solid waste are not anticipated to be generated by the proposed use on the Property. Any solid wastes will be collected and transported by private haulers to the Frederick County landfill. 150 151 152 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. PRE-SCOPE OF WORK MEETING FORM Information on the Project Traffic Impact Analysis Base Assumptions The applicant is responsible for entering the relevant information and submitting the form to VDOT and the locality no less than three (3) business days prior to the meeting. If a form is not received by this deadline, the scope of work meeting may be postponed. Contact Information Consultant Name: Tele: E-mail: Pennoni Associates, Inc. Douglas Kennedy: (703) 840-4830 dkennedy@pennoni.com REVISED ELEMENTS FROM 6/9 CALL SHOWN IN CAPS; Developer/Owner Name: Tele: E-mail: Pilot Company Brad Alsup (865) 474-2417 Brad.Alsup@pilottravelcenters.com Project Information Project Name: Pilot Travel Center NW Ex 323 Locality/County: Frederick Co. Project Location: (Attach regional and site specific location map) The site is located northwest of the Rest Chutch Road/I-81 Exit 323 interchange. see GDP Exhibit A and location Map Figure 1. Submission Type Comp Plan Rezoning Site Plan Subd Plat Project Description: (Including details on the land use, acreage, phasing, access location, etc. Attach additional sheet if necessary) Proposed Rezoning from Rural to commercial use, with new Comp. Plan Spine Road west of site for full acess to Rte 669 at new location. See GDP in Figure A. REVISED DRAFT ACCESS SPACING PLAN (11"x17") PROVIDED FOR REST CHURCH RD Proposed Land Uses: Travel center with drive thru support retail/fast food restaurant with 20 pumps (12 car and 8 pumps for trucks) Acreage: 15 +/- acres on parcel 23A-18 out of total 156 acre site Development will occur in a one phase Proposed Use(s): (Check all that apply; attach additional pages as necessary) Residential Commercial Mixed Use Other 153 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Residential Uses(s) Number of Units: 0 DU ITE LU Code(s): Commercial Use(s) ITE LU Code(s): 934, 960 20 f.p.~13.7 KSF Square Ft or Other Variable: Other Use(s) ITE LU Code(s): N/A Independent Variable(s): Total Peak Hour Trip Projection: Less than 100 100 – 499 500 – 999 1,000 or more Traffic Impact Analysis Assumptions Study Period Existing Year: 2020 Build-out Year: 2022 Design Year: 2030 Study Area Boundaries (Attach map) North: West Va boundary South: I-81 Ex 323 south ramps East: US Rte 11 West: Rest Church Rd (Rte 669) access External Factors That Could Affect Project (Planned road improvements, other nearby developments) Access location proximity to I-81 ramps and VDOT goal to provide increased seperation for turns at Zachary Ann Lane. Ultimate County Road function for future employment uses north of site. DISCUSSION OF PLANNED ROAD LOCATION AND SERVICE AREA NORTH OF SITE SHOULD BE DISCUSSED, EVEN IF NOT RESPONSIBILITY OF SUBJECT APPLICATION. TRAFFIC STUDY TO INCLUDE REDEVELOPMENT FOR LONG-TERM SCENARIO WITH GENERAL EXISTING SEWER SERVICE AREA FOR NORTH COLLECTOR. NO COUNTY PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSED. PROVIDE ACCESS SPACING GRAPHIC FOR REST CHURCH ROAD TO HIGHLIGHT IF RAMP ACCESS SPACING WAIVERS ARE REQUIRED. SHOWN WITH 200 FT LANE AND 200 FT TAPER. SUGGEST SPACING WAIVER AT 167 FT FROM END OF PROPSED LANE TO INTERSTATE Consistency With Comprehensive Plan (Land use, transportation plan) Current Zoning is Rural Agriculture Proposed Rezoning to Employment Uses, See Figure 2B. Available Traffic Data (Historical, forecasts) See attached Table 1a, 1b and 1c for historical VDOT AADT for I-81, Rte 11 and Rte 669. through 2019) 154 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Trip Distribution (Attach sketch) Road Name: I-81 N 45% CARS Road Name: I-81 S 45% CARS Road Name: Route 11 5% CARS (See Figure 3) Road Name: Rest Church Rd 5% CARS Annual Vehicle Trip Growth Rate: 0.5% . Peak Period for Study (check all that apply) AM PM SAT Peak Hour of the Generator N/A Study Intersections and/or Road Segments (Attach additional sheets as necessary) 1.Rte 669/Future collector 6. 2.Rte 669/Zachary Ann Lane * 7. 3.Rte 669/I-81 SB ramps ** 8. 4.Rte 669/I-81 NB ramps 9. 5.US Rte 1/Rte 669Business Blvd 10. Trip Adjustment Factors Internal allowance: Yes No Reduction: 25% trips Pass-by allowance: Yes No Reduction: 60% - AM (53% PM) 50% Daily% trips Software Methodology Synchro HCS (v.2000/+) aaSIDRA CORSIM Other Traffic Signal Proposed or Affected (Analysis software to be used, progression speed, cycle length) Rest Church Rd @ signals at 3 locations I-81 ramps and at Rte/Business Boulevard.: VDOT to provide existing timings Improvement(s) Assumed or to be Considered Background Traffic Studies Considered To be edited by VDOT at Scoping Call See other uses included in Table 3 REVISED TO SHOW SHELL OPENING AND INCLUDE USES NORTH OF PILOT IN EXISTING SEWER SERVICE AREA. Plan Submission Master Development Plan (MDP) Generalized Development Plan (GDP) Preliminary/Sketch Plan Other Plan type (Final Site, Subd. Plan) Additional Issues to be Addressed Queuing analysis Actuation/Coordination Weaving analysis Merge analysis Bike/Ped Accommodations Intersection(s) TDM Measures Other Access Management Spacing for new Public Road Acess at Rest Church Rd, per Comp Plan. NOTES on ASSUMPTIONS: 155 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. 1. Traffic Counts: 6-9 AM and 4-7 PM at selected Study Intersections ((#2 ** and #3 *) collected in June 2020 for warrant check (* 13 hrs) and ** (I-81 SB ramp) for verification of 2020 growth. 2. Factor volumes and compare to pre-COVID numbers. See attachment B email to verify that 2016 base volumes with growth at 0.5% annually are acceptable for 2020 link volumes. Historical Growth trends in Tables 1a-1c thru 2019. Effective growth at same rate 0..% /yr annually from 2016 as used for Business Blvd study (1% 2014 to 2016) COUNTS OK AT ZACHARY ANN LANE. WILL NEED TO PROVIDE LINK VOLUMES SEPERATELY TO VERIFY METHODOLOGY. SHOW FROM OLD COUNTS FOR VDOT TE OK. 3. Verify from date of counts the overall business (as perentage of average sales) for Flying J facilty in SW quadrant to adjust link volumes on Zachary Ann Lane. for factoring hourly volumes for review of traffic control type in future volumes. OK FOR ADJUSTMENT 4. Peak Hour Factors based on existing counts. Future PHF at 0.92 or existing, whichever is higher, per TOSAM guidelines. 5. Trip generation for possible comercial use at site, shown as gas station with app. 13,700 sf. use REVISED with 20 pumps and fast food uses. . See Table 2A for trip ranges and Table 2B for recommended trips. Used option B2 as fast food, conven. + truck stop to account for mix of activities and to account for seperation of heeavy vehicle trips (rear of site) and gas/con. uses (front of site) . TRUCK TRAFFIC HALF OF ITE RATES, BUT OK APPROACH USING PROVIDED FUEL DATA. ADJUST CAR TRIPS FOR SIZE OF FACILITY BASED ON FAST FOOD AREA AT 3,768 SF, NOT 3,000 FROM 6/1 SCOPING. REVISED TABLE 2B 6. Include internal trips between conv ctr and fast food drive thru uses. Pass-by trips shown in Table 2B to be applied to composite Route 11 and Route 81 ramps (i.e., existing peak on approach of ramps SB, NB, and Rte 11 approach at Rest Church Rd) REVISED PASS-BY FOR TRAVEL CENTER NOT FROM RTE 11; ONLY FOR I-81 RAMPS AND REST CHURCH RD FRONTAGE. NO TRUCK PASS-BY 7. Truck traffic shown seperately for 8 pumps in site for heavy vehicle trips to calculate HV % . Show as separate assignments in TIS. Truck fueling data addeed to gas/con based on local data provided by client (see Attachment C). TIA assignments to show a) Site trips conv/ff b) Site trips Truck Stop as HV c) pass-by trips conv/ff 156 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. REVISED DISTRIBUTIONS FOR NO TRUCK TRAFFIC WEST ON REST CHURCH ROAD, WITH EXISTING THROUGH TRUCK RESTRICTION TO WELLTOWN RD. UPDATE DISTRIBUTIONS TO 2.5% ON RTE 11 WITH OTHER GAS STATION AT RTE 11/BUSINESS BLVD. 8. Site Phasing for ultimate road access includes 5k bank use and sit down restaurant at 10,000 sf, (app. 3.5 acres) . Other employment uses for ultimate road sizing north of subject site at 200,000 sf @ 0.275 FAR for 16.5 acres. See Table 3 SHOWN FOR LONG-TERM. WILL NEED TO PROVIDE LINK TRIPS ON COLLECTOR 9. Other development from the 2017 Whitehall Business Center TIA included as added to existing volumes. See Table 3 for list. Existing Business Blvd trips east of US Rte 11 from forecasts for non-December high cube warehouse uses activities, 10. TIA to include the following scenarios: a) Existing (2020) b) Background with 2% Growth and short-term additional development "No Build" (2022), c)Total short-term with Phase 1 Site "Build" 2022, d) Background with 2% growth and long-term additonal development "No Build" (2030) e) Total Build-out with Site "Build" 2030 11. Initial access includes channelization to prohibit left turns in and out at eastern entrance, opposite Zachary Ann Lane. Full access to the west for exit turns to I-81 and east GRAPHIC PROVIDED TO SHOW PROPOSED TURN LANE SPACING FROM RAMP, WITH POSSIBLE EXTRA LANE ADDED TO SB EXIT FOR DIMENSIONING. SPACING IS LESS THAN 750 FT TO ACCESS AND LESS THAN 300 FT TO TURN LANE, BUT USE AS RIGHT IN/OUT,ADDED TURN LANE AND PROVISION FOR SPACING TO FUTURE COLLECTOR AT OVER 1,325 FT SHOULD HELP MITIGATE SPACING DEFICIENCIES. .ALTERNATIVE ACCESS TO SATISFY VDOT ACCESS MANAGEMENT AT 300 FT TURN LANE BEGINNING OR MORE THAN 750 FEET TO ACCESS (SHOWN IN MAGENTA) IS NOT DESIRABLE DUE TO INTERSECTION OFF-SET FROM ZACHARY ANN LANE AT LESS THAN 150 FT. OTHER COMMENTS: * CHECK STACKING ON RAMPS TO VERIFY IF QUEUES EXTEND PAST STORAGE * REVISE SCOPING AND DISTRIBUTE FOR VDOT AND COUNTY 2ND REVIEW *RTE 669 REST CHURCH ROAD THROUGH TRUCK RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE NOTED IN REPORT * "DIVERSIONS" FROM FLYNG J TO SITE MAY OCCUR, BUT ARE NOT FACTORED INTO TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS. * DISTRIBUTIONS PRIMARILY FROM I-81 FOR PASS-BY AND NEW TRIPS. SEE FIGURE 3. 157 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Figure 1 Location Exhibit A GDP 158 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Figure 2A Comp Plan Figure 2B Road Plan 159 Pilot Travel Center 1031-01 Table 2A Site Trip Generation Ranges Rev. June 2020 ITE Land Use (1,2)AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY DENSITY USE IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL (2-way) East Land Bay Option A: as Truck Stop 950 950.110 13.700 ksf Truck Stop (3) 182 181 363 165 146 311 6,242 950 950.210 20 F. Pos Truck Stop 73 71 144 82 86 168 0 Option B1: as Individual Uses w/ ITE Truck Stop Data 960 960.410 12 F. Pos Super Convenience Market/Gas Station 169 168 337 138 138 276 2,766 934 934.110 3.768 ksf Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru (4) 77 74 151 64 59 123 1,775 950 950.310 8 F. Pos Truck Stop (Daily Derived)(5) 29 28 57 33 34 67 1,346 275 270 545 235 231 466 5,887 Option B2: as Individual Uses w/ Client-Provided Local Truck Stop Data 960 960.410 12 F. Pos Super Convenience Market/Gas Station 169 168 337 138 138 276 2,766 934 934.110 3.768 ksf Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru (4) 77 74 151 64 59 123 1,775 950 950.900 8 F. Pos Truck Stop (client provided)(6) 17 17 34 19 20 39 672 263 259 522 221 217 438 5,213 Option C1: as Gas/Conv w/ sf 945 945.110 4.747 ksf Gas/Service w/ Convenience Market 184 177 361 214 205 419 6,836 Option C2: as Gas/Conv based on total pumps 945 945.410 20 Pumps Gas/Service w/ Convenience Mart 127 122 249 143 137 280 4,107 Option C3: as Gas/Conv based on pumps w/ FF 945 945.410 20 Pumps Gas/Service w/ Convenience Mart 127 122 249 143 137 280 4,107 934 934.110 3.768 ksf Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru 77 74 151 64 59 123 1,775 204 196 400 207 196 403 5,882 Option D1: as Super Gas/Conv based on pumps 960 960.410 20 F. Pos Super Convenience Market/Gas Station 281 281 562 230 229 459 4,610 Option D2: as Super Gas/Conv based on sf 960 960.110 4.747 ksf Super Convenience Market/Gas Station198 197 395 165 164 329 3,976 Option E: as Super Conv/ w fast food 934 934.110 3.768 ksf Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru 77 74 151 64 59 123 1,775 960 960.410 20 F. Pos Super Convenience Market/Gas Station 281 281 562 230 229 459 4,610 358 355 713 294 288 582 6,385 Proposed, Revised with Internal Use Alocations 20 F. Pos Option B2 (7)263 259 522 221 217 438 5,213 Average of scenarios A, B, C , D, and E 512 439 5,666 Total Trips for VDOT 527 Threshold No internal/Pass-by Trips 5,213 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily (2-way)% Inbound (2-way)% Inbound Weekday (2-way) 6/ 8 (4) 950 Truck Stop ksf 26.50 50% 22.70 53% 455.62 1/ 1 (0) 950 Truck Stop F. Pos 7.20 51% 8.40 49% 0.00 39/ 48 (14) 960 Super Convenience Market/Gas Station F. Pos 28.08 50% 23.00 50% 230.50 111/ 185 (67) 934 Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru ksf 40.07 51% 32.64 52% 471.07 1/ 1 (0) 950 Truck Stop (Daily Derived)F. Pos 7.13 51% 8.38 49% 168.25 14/ 6 (5) 945 Gas/Service w/ Convenience Market ksf 76.05 51% 88.27 51% 1,440.07 14/ 6 (5) 945 Gas/Service w/ Convenience Mart Pumps 12.45 51% 14.00 51% 205.35 39/ 48 (14) 960 Super Convenience Market/Gas Station F. Pos 28.10 50% 22.95 50% 230.50 39/ 48 (14) 960 Super Convenience Market/Gas Station ksf 83.21 50% 69.31 50% 837.58 950 Truck Stop (client provided)F. Pos 4.25 50% 4.88 49% 84.00 For average rates = (Density) x (ave. trip rate) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In For ITE equations, "e" noted = (Density) x ( trip equation) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In (2) ITE Land Use Code shown as the first 3 digits. Decimal shown for internal use by Pennoni for lookup table for trip rate variable. (3) Effective trip rates calculated by land use: (4) Fast food uses default to western side of building. Revised area at 3,768 sf (5) Daily trip rates derived at .05K , based on factored from trips per 1,000 sf. (6) See attachment C for average truck data baed on sales, added to site trips in addition to conv/fast food trips. (7) Use combination of uses to account for heavy vehicle trips in rear of site. See Table 2B for internal trips CODE Variable ALL TRIPS ARE VEHICLE TRIPS UNLESS NOTED Number of Studies AM/PM(Daily) Effective Trip Rates (3) (1) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition), Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 2017. Average trip rates used, unless noted with "e", then equations used. Revised Square Footage from 6/1 scope Pennoni PILOT20001 10th Edition_TripGen20r 160 Pilot Travel Center 1031-01 Table 2B Site Trip Generation Rev. June 2020 ITE Land Use (1,2)AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY DENSITY USE IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL (2-way) East Land Bay Option B2: as Individual Uses w/ Client-Provided Local Truck Stop Data 960 960.410 12 F. Pos Super Convenience Market/Gas Station 169 168 337 138 138 276 2,766 934 934.110 3.768 ksf Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru (4) 77 74 151 64 59 123 1,775 950 950.900 8 F. Pos Truck Stop (client provided)(6) 17 17 34 19 20 39 672 263 259 522 221 217 438 5,213 Proposed 20 F. Pos Option B(2)(7)263 259 522 221 217 438 5,213 AM PM Trip Adjustments: 25%25%Peak/Daily 25%Internal FF to Conv Ctr (8)-19 -19 -38 -16 -15 -31 -444 Peak/Daily Internal Conv Ctr to FF (8)-19 -19 -38 -15 -16 -31 -444 60% 53% Peak/Daily 50%Pass-bys for Gas/Conv. Use:(9)-89 -89 -178 -74 -73 -147 -1,161 49% 50% Peak/Daily 49%Pass-bys for fast food use:(10)-27 -27 -54 -21 -22 -43 -652 0% 0% Peak/Daily 0%Pass-bys for Truck Stop Use:(9)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Trip Adjustments -154 -154 -308 -126 -126 -252 -2,701 Assignments Fast Food + Sup. Conv- internal- passby Travel Center Cars 92 88 180 76 71 147 1,840 Truck Stop (client provided)Travel Center Heavy Vehicles 17 17 34 19 20 39 672 Passby FF + Conv.Travel Center Pass-By Trips 116 116 232 95 95 190 1,813 w/o pass-by Trips Net External Comm. Trips 109 105 214 95 91 186 2,512 Total Trips for VDOT 527 Threshold No internal/Pass-by Trips 5,213 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily (2-way)% Inbound (2-way)% Inbound Weekday (2-way) 39/ 48 (14) 960 Super Convenience Market/Gas Station F. Pos 28.08 50% 23.00 50% 230.50 111/ 185 (67) 934 Fast-Food w/ Drive-Thru ksf 40.07 51% 32.64 52% 471.07 950 Truck Stop (client provided)F. Pos 4.25 50% 4.88 49% 84.00 For average rates = (Density) x (ave. trip rate) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In For ITE equations, "e" noted = (Density) x ( trip equation) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In (5) Daily trip rates derived at .05K , based on factored from trips per 1,000 sf. CODE Variable ALL TRIPS ARE VEHICLE TRIPS UNLESS NOTED Number of Studies AM/PM(Daily) Revised Square Footage from 6/1 scope (6) See attachment C for average truck data baed on sales, added to site trips in addition to conv/fast food trips. (7) Use combination of uses to account for heavy vehicle trips in rear of site. See Table 2B for internal trips (8) internal trips based on credit for trips between fast food uses and convenience store , to be conservative @ 25%. No trips added to roads (9) From ITE Trip Generation Handbook, average of Tables E.18 AM and E.19 -20 PM. Daily estimated. Used for gas/conv. store Effective Trip Rates (3) (1) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition), Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 2017. Average trip rates used, unless noted with "e", then equations used. (2) ITE Land Use Code shown as the first 3 digits. Decimal shown for internal use by Pennoni for lookup table for trip rate variable. (3) Effective trip rates calculated by land use: (4) Fast food uses default to western side of building. Revised area at 3,768 sf Pennoni PILOT20001 10th Edition_TripGen20r 161 REST C H U R C H R D June 2020 Project # PILOT19001 TRAFFIC IMPACT PILOT TRAVEL CENTER-EXIT 323 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA ANALYSIS SITE TRIP DISTRIBUTIONS- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)1 - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) Rest Church Rd Rest Church Rd Zachary Ann LnFutureRest Church Rd Rest Church Rd -SB I-81 RampRest Church Rd Rest Church Rd NB I-81 Ramp-43 - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (-)- (-)- (-)- (-)- (-) - (-) 5 Rest Church Rd Business Blvd US Route 11US Route 11- Future FutureFutureNOT TO SCALEMARTINSBURG PIKELEGEND 6 1 2 3 4 5 INTERSTATE 81 11 BUSI N E S S B L V D ZACHARY ANN LNFLYING J TRAVEL CENTER GAS PU M P S PUMPSGAS TRUCK PARKING SITE 6 Rest Church Rd Rest Church Rd -Future CollectorFIGURE 3 AM (PM) AM (PM) #STUDY INTERSECTION LANE GEOMETRY SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION STOP CONTROL SITE BOUNDARY SITE TRIP DISTIBUTIONS LANE/MOVEMENT LOS APPROACH LOS OVERALL INTERSECTION LOS AM (PM) EXIT 323 (RTE 66 9 ) 2 - (-)FUTURECOLLECTORCars: 5%, 10%PASS-BYS Cars: 45%,45%PASS-BYS Trucks: 47.5%,50%PASS-BYS Cars: 2.5% Trucks: 2.5% __% Cars: 45%,45%PASS-BYS Trucks: 47.5%,50%PASS-BYS Cars: 2.5% Trucks: 2.5% 162 1 Douglas R. Kennedy From:Timothy Rhodes <timothy.rhodes@vdot.virginia.gov> Sent:Wednesday, March 25, 2020 2:40 PM To:Ronald A. Mislowsky Cc:Rhonda Funkhouser; Riggleman, Bradley Subject:Traffic Study Attachments:Pennoni_Hilw1604_Whitehall TIA_20170109s.pdf; Exit-323-2016-Traffic-Counts.pdf; Exit-323-2020-Forecasts-1-percent-growth.pdf; Exit-323-Proposed-Distribution-Facility- Site-Trips.pdf Ron, To follow up on our phone conversation the other day, I have contacted District Planning for input. The advice given for the Pilot Truck Stop is as follows: We recommend you utilize the 2016 count data, apply a background growth rate of 0.5% and then apply the distribution facility trips to forecast the current traffic counts. We think this is the best approach given the current situation. The Exit 323 Distribution Center TIA is attached for your reference. We have also attached individual pages from the report that we can utilize to forecast current conditions at the interchange. The 2016 traffic counts generally reflect 2019 AADT based on a quick StreetLight analysis, with the exception of about a 1,500 trip increase on Rest Church Road related to the distribution facility. We scoped a 1% annual background growth rate for the 2016 counts to the 2020 build year in the TIA (also attached). Based on the 2019 StreetLight AADT estimates, this level of growth probably has not occurred over the last 4 years, this is why we advise the 0.5% growth rate. Finally, we have also attached the custom trip assignments agreed to for the distribution facility (cars and heavy vehicles). Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Timothy Rhodes VDOT~Land Development Engineer Clarke, Frederick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA. 22824 (540)-984-5630 163 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Table 3 Other Uses REVISED SIGNED: _________________________________ DATE: ______________ Applicant or Consultant PRINT NAME: _____________________________ Applicant or Consultant 164 12:00AM 01:00AM 02:00AM 03:00AM 04:00AM 05:00AM 06:00AM 07:00AM 08:00AM 09:00AM 10:00AM 11:00AM 12:00PM 01:00PM 02:00PM 03:00PM 04:00PM 05:00PM 06:00PM 07:00PM 08:00PM 09:00PM 10:00PM 11:00PM Day TotalThursday13 12 17 16 21 20 27 30 34 39 38 41 40 38 39 39 38 33 30 29 24 20 19 16 672Friday14 15 15 15 20 21 27 24 30 32 31 35 32 33 30 29 30 30 26 20 19 16 14 12 572Saturday10 9 9 11 11 13 15 17 20 26 27 28 24 27 26 22 21 18 15 14 12 11 8 7 398Sunday5 5 6 6 6 9 9 13 17 20 22 24 30 26 26 25 25 25 19 19 17 17 12 11 393Monday9 9 13 13 15 13 18 20 23 30 26 32 33 32 35 31 31 31 28 25 21 17 16 16 538Tuesday13 12 11 17 18 17 24 30 30 36 36 38 38 40 43 41 35 34 33 28 24 21 18 17 655Wednesday14 13 15 18 18 20 25 30 33 39 36 39 40 37 41 39 39 37 32 29 23 21 18 15 670Total for week79 75 88 96 109 113 146 163 188 222 217 237 238 234 238 225 219 208 182 164 139 122 105 94 3,898Hourly percentage 2.02% 1.93% 2.25% 2.45% 2.78% 2.90% 3.73% 4.18% 4.82% 5.69% 5.55% 6.07% 6.10% 5.99% 6.12% 5.77% 5.62% 5.33% 4.68% 4.21% 3.58% 3.12% 2.69% 2.41% 100.00%Expected transactions 7 7 8 9 10 10 13 15 17 20 20 22 22 21 22 21 20 19 17 15 13 11 10 9 356 Expected volume 800,000 gallons/ monthAverage fill 105 gallonsTruck fills/month 7,619 Truck fills/day 254 Safety factor 1.4 (accounts for non-fueling customers)Trucks/day 356 Distribution numbers are based on 13 week average for Flying J across Rest Church Road.165 167' 130'300' 671' 1326' 806' REST C H U R C H R D (RTE 66 9 )SB I-81 OFF-RAMPFUTURE COLLECTOR(52' WIDTH)ZACHARY ANN LNPROPOSED PILOT TRAVEL CENTER EXISTING FLYING J TRAVEL CENTER 200' TU R N L A N E 200' TA P E R 200' TU R N L A N E 200' TA P E R225'PRIVA T E S T R E E T PRIVATE STREET280'WB RES T C H U R C H R D W I D E N E D T O U4 DIVI D E D S E C T I O N W I T H O U T S I D E LANE D R O P A T F U T U R E C O L L E C T O R 665'168'LEGEND BY PILOT FUTURE (POSSIBLE), BY OTHERS ALTERNATIVE* (NOT PREFERRED) *TO AVOID VDOT WAIVER FOR ACCESS SPACING FROM LIMITED ACCESS ROADWAY RAMPS BUT MAY REQUIRE VDOT WAIVER FOR INTERSECTION SPACING FROM ZACHARY ANN LN; NOT PREFERRED, SHOWN FOR INFORMATION ONLY.U:\ACCOUNTS\PILOT\PILOT19001 - PILOT TRAVEL CENTER - EXIT 323\DESIGN\_EXHIBITS\TRAFFIC\PILOTEXIT323-ACCESSSPACINGEXHIBIT.DWGPLOTTED: 6/16/2020 1:39:07 PM, BY: WAN CHONG PLOTSTYLE: PENNONI NCS.STB, PROJECT STATUS: ----ALL DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY PENNONI ASSOCIATES ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE IN RESPECT OF THE PROJECT. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BY OWNER OR OTHERS ON THE EXTENSIONS OF THE PROJECT OR ON ANY OTHER PROJECT. ANY REUSE WITHOUT WRITTEN VERIFICATION OR ADAPTATION BY PENNONI ASSOCIATES FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE INTENDED WILL BE AT OWNERS SOLE RISK AND WITHOUT LIABILITY OR LEGAL EXPOSURE TO PENNONI ASSOCIATES; AND OWNER SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS PENNONI ASSOCIATES FROM ALL CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LOSSES AND EXPENSES ARISING OUT OF OR RESULTING THEREFROM. PILOT20001 1"=100' WC 2020-06-16 DRK SHEET APPROVED BY OF1 1 DRAWN BY DRAWING SCALE DATE PROJECT PILOT TRAVEL CENTER - EXIT 323 FREDERICK COUNTY, VA PILOT COMPANY ACCESS SPACING 00 100'200' 5508 LONAS DRIVE KNOXVILLE, TN 37909 PENNONI ASSOCIATES INC. 117 East Piccadilly Street Winchester, VA 22601 T 540.667.2139 F 540.665.0493 NORTHDRAFT 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. PRE-SCOPE OF WORK MEETING FORM Information on the Project Traffic Impact Analysis Base Assumptions The applicant is responsible for entering the relevant information and submitting the form to VDOT and the locality no less than three (3) business days prior to the meeting. If a form is not received by this deadline, the scope of work meeting may be postponed. Contact Information Consultant Name: Tele: E-mail: Pennoni Associates Inc. c/o Douglas Kennedy, PE and Ron Mislowsky, PE (703) 840-4830 (540) 771-2085 dkennedy@pennoni.com rmislowsky@Pennoni.com Developer/Owner Name: Tele: E-mail: Hillwood SCOPING FORM REVISED 10/31/16 FOR 10/25/16 MEETING REVISIONS IN CAPS (SEE MEETING NOTES) c/o Sean O'Brien (770) 407-4764 sean.obrien@hillwood.com Project Information Project Name: Hillwood Whitehall Commerce Center Locality/County: Frederick County Project Location: (Attach regional and site specific location map) The site is located east of Route 11 at the Business Boulevard/ Rest Church Road intersection, north of Woodbine Road (Route 669), west of the Conrail System railroad, and south of the West Virginia border. A small portion of the parcel does lie within West Virginia. (see Exhibit A for map) Submission Type Comp Plan Rezoning Site Plan Subd Plat Project Description: (Including details on the land use, acreage, phasing, access location, etc. Attach additional sheet if necessary) Proposed 1,016,080 SF high cube warehouse distribution center in the short-term with future long-term development of 12.45 acre industrial park with up to 216,900 SF (trip generation shown in attached Table 1 and Site Plan shown as Exhibit B). A previous TIA for the site was for an industrial park with a small retail element as part of the rezoning application, by PHR+A "Sempeles Property" TIA, December 16, 2002. Entrance via Business Boulevard east of Route 11, opposite Rest Church Rd. The existing Business Boulevard stub is to be extended east as a THREE lane WITH CENTER TURN LANE public street with a secondary connection to the site to Woodbine Road. The intersection formed at Woodbine Road by this connection is a second entrance. Inbound truck traffic on Business Boulevard is proposed to be routed via Woodbine Road FROM EXIT 323 AND ROUTED TO RTE 11 SB, PER APPROVED DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS TO AVOID TRUCK STACKING BACK 185 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. THROUGH INTERCHANGE RAMP SIGNALS Exit to Business Boulevard via north driveway. Initial site plan use as warehouse distribution hi-cube center. Long-term uses ALSO add building in SW corner (west of Business Blvd. as Gen. Industrial). SEE EXHIBIT B FOR SITE LAYOUT Proposed Use(s): (Check all that apply; attach additional pages as necessary) Residential Commercial Mixed Use Other Residential Uses(s) Number of Units: ITE LU Code(s): Commercial Use(s) ITE LU Code(s): Square Ft or Other Variable: Other Use(s) ITE LU Code(s): 152 110 Independent Variable(s): 1,016.08 KSF 216.9 KSF Peak Hour trip projections 1,000 or more during peak season only Total Peak Hour Trip Projection: Less than 100 100 – 499 500 – 999 1,000 or more Traffic Impact Analysis Assumptions Study Period Existing Year: 2016 Build-out Year: 2020 Design Year: 2025 Study Area Boundaries (Attach map) North: North site boundary South: Woodbine Road (Route 669) East: East site boundary (existing railroad) West: I-81 exit at Rest Church Rd External Factors That Could Affect Project (Planned road improvements, other nearby developments) I-81 interchange signals at exit 323. Other development adjacent to site may develop, include in forecasts. VDOT IMPROVING ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION LANES AT EXIT FROM/TO I-81 SOUTH (NB EXIT, SB ON RAMP). Consistency With Comprehensive Plan (Land use, transportation plan) The 2030 County Land Use Plan (see Exhibit C) shows the site's land use as "industrial". The proposed distribution center use is consistent with that land use. The County has a draft plan for 2035 which shows no land use changes to the site. The 2030 County Transportaion Plan (see Exhibit D) plans for the road within the site to connect at the Business Boulevard extension, east of Route 11, to Woodbine Road with a direct connection. The road connection is shown in the site plan to transition Business Boulevard to a THREE lane WITH CENTER TURN LANE public street for access to Woodbine Road. Business Boulevard east of Route 11 and Woodbine Road are currently classified as local roads but are shown upgraded in the Plan as major collectors with urban 4-lane median-divided sections. Route 11, currently classified as a major collector, is planned to be upgraded to a minor 186 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. arterial with an urban 4-lane median-divided section. The TIA will not consider these planned roadway section improvements. The TIA build-out for the 1 million SF warehouse distribution center assumes design year of 2020. Build-out for total site with added industrial uses as shown for 2025. Available Traffic Data (Historical, forecasts) VDOT Daily Traffic Volume Estimates (2002-2015) for I-81 and Route 11 in the site vicinity (shown in attached Table 2). USING MR. FUEL TRAFFIC VOLUMES FROM 2013 AND GROWING TO BASE YEAR. Trip Distribution (Attach sketch) Road Name: Route 11 N 10% (0% TRUCKS) Route 11 S 10% (0% TRUCKS) Road Name: Rest Church Road 5% (0% TRUCKS) Road Name: I-81 N 35% (50% TRUCKS) I-81 S 35% (50% TRUCKS) Road Name: Woodbine Road 5% (0% TRUCKS) Annual Vehicle Trip Growth Rate: 1.0% ANUALLY Peak Period for Study (check all that apply) AM PM SAT Peak Hour of the Generator N/A Study Intersections and/or Road Segments (Attach additional sheets as necessary) 1.Route 11/ Rest Church Road/Business Blvd 6.Business Boulevard/ Aikens-Claytor Parcel Entrance 2.I-81 NB Exit/Entrance at Rest Church Rd 7.Business Boulevard Extension/ Proposed Industrial Access Road (3 internal intersections) 3.I-81 SB Exit/Entrance at Rest Church Rd 8. 4.Route 11/ Woodbine Road 9. 5.Woodbine Road/ Business Blvd. 10. Trip Adjustment Factors Internal allowance: Yes No Reduction: % trips Pass-by allowance: Yes No Reduction: ITE guidance% trips Software Methodology Synchro HCS (v.2000/+) aaSIDRA CORSIM Other Traffic Signal Proposed or Affected (Analysis software to be used, progression speed, cycle length) Existing signals at Route 11/ Rest Church Road and I-81 ramps. Synchro 9 software for analysis, cycle length data to be obtained from VDOT. REQUESTED SIGNAL TIMING FILES AT MEETING. Use TOSAM guidance , ANTICIPATED V/C TO exceeded CAPACITY to review MAX queue lengths in SimTraffic . Improvement(s) Assumed or to be Considered Business Boulevard extended as a THREE lane WITH CENTER TURN LANE public street connecting Rest Church Road with Woodbine Road. Background Traffic Studies Considered See Exhibit E for other development uses: Aikens-Claytor (south of Business Blvd.), Arogas (north of Bus. Blvd), Parcel 12C/1 (NW of site), Parcel 12 (SW of 187 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. site), and Light Property Plan Submission Master Development Plan (MDP) Generalized Development Plan (GDP) Preliminary/Sketch Plan Other Plan type (Final Site, Subd. Plan) Additional Issues to be Addressed Queuing analysis Actuation/Coordination Weaving analysis Merge analysis Bike/Ped Accommodations Intersection(s) TDM Measures Other NOTES on ASSUMPTIONS: COUNTS / EXISTING CONDITIONS: 1. No new traffic counts proposed for AM /PM peak periods. Factor up from 2014 counts (Mr. Fuel TIA) on Rte 11/ Rest Church Road/Business Blvd, I-81 ramps, and Route 11/ Woodbine Road 2. Peak hour factors based on existing counts. Future with growth at 0.92 PHF or existing, whichever is higher, per VDOT traffic analysis guidelines. Assume new uses at 0.92. ASSUME SITE USE AS DISTRIBUTION CENTER AT 0.70 PHF Use overall intersection PHF per HCM 2010 guidance. TRIP GENERATION 1. Trip rates based on client estimates, see Attachment 1 for peak season and non peak season. See Table 3 for comparison to High Cube Warehouse Distribution average trip rates. Client-estimated site trips higher. 2. Site trips shown for 2020 for PEAK season estimates. Include long term scenario with PEAK season uses (November through DECEMBER) to verify local roadway network adequacy. 3. Distributions updated from 2002 TIA for orientation to the east for Woodbine Road. 4. Traffic study to assign heavy vehicles separately and show total site trips. Trucks shown ENTERING via Woodbine Road to Business Blvd and rear gate. Egress via counterclockwise access to Rte 11 via north driveway. ADJUST TRUCK PERCENT DISTRIBUTION TO REFLECT ORIENTATION TO I-81 AT 50% NORTH AND SOUTH, SHOWN IN EXHIBIT A. 5. No internal trips. 6. Long term uses assume general industrial west of Bus. Blvd. VERIFY LOCAL ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL USES EAST OF RTE 11 TO BUSINESS BOULEVARD BASED ON STACKING OTHER DEVELOPMENT 188 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. 1. See Table 4 for trips for other uses. Assumed portions for 2020 and 2025 AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT E BY YEAR. 2. Pass-by Trips only for 'background' commercial uses, based on ITE guidance for peaks, default to 15/25% for AM and Daily peaks if no ITE data provided . Use 45% Daily for conv. store vs 63-66% peaks in ITE. See Table 5. 3. Show pass-by trips for other developments in report Appendix. OTHER NOTES 1.Extension of Business Boulevard as public street shown as THREE lane in concept plan as VDOT GS-7 collector at 30 MPH design speed. Check turn lane requirements at on-site driveways. FOR PEAK USES, VERIFY IF ROUNDABOUT OPTION AT SITE PARKIN G LOT ENTRANCE WOULD BE BETTER OPERATION FOR PEAK EMPLOYEE ACCESS 2. Traffic Study required for Site Plan. Shown for subject use and with pot ential employment uses on remaining 12.45 acres to size road connections. 3. VDOT FUNCTION OF BUSINESS BOULEVARD WITH TRUCK RESTRICTION REVIEWED. EXISTING SIGNAGE NOT TO STANDARD AND MAY NOT BE DESIRABLE. CONSIDER WAYFINDING SIGNING ALTERNATIVE TO IMPLEMENT TO AVOID EX. OVERHEAD GANTRY. 4. WOODBINE RD PLANNED AS U4 SECTION. VERIFY TURN LANE NEEDS WITH ADDED TRUCKS 5. ASSUME RAISED MEDIAN ON RTE 11 6. PROVIDE AUTO TURN REVIEW FOR SITE PLAN 7. VERIFY EMPLOYEE USES AND TIMES OF ARRIVAL WITH TENANT. EXPERIENCE IN PETERSBURG HAD SIGNIFICANT PEAK EMPLOYEE USES. NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS PROPOSED SITE, DIFFERENT DISTRIBUTION CENTER . TO ACCOUNT FOR POSSIBLE PEAK ARRIVALS, CALCULATE SITE PEAK HOUR FACTOR AT 0.70 FOR SITE PASSENGER CARS (50% INBOUND AND 20-25% OUTBOUND OF PM PEAK IN 15 MINUTE INTERVAL) TO INCREASE PEAK FACTORS (VS. 0.92 DEFAULT) SEE EMAIL 10/26 FROM R. MISLOWSKY ON OPERATIONS (ATTACHMENT 2). Attachments Exhibit A: Study Vicinity with intersection locations and trip distributions REVISED Exhibit B: Site Plan Exhibit C: Land Use Plan Exhibit D: Eastern Frederick Co. Road Plan Existing Conditions Functional Classifications 189 It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Exhibit E: Other Area Development REVISED Attachment 1: Site Trip Estimates by hour (2 pages) FOR OFF-PEAK AND PEAK SEASONS Table 1: Trip Generation REVISED Table 2: VDOT Growth Trends Table 3: Trip Generation Comparison REVISED Table 4: Other Development Trip Generation 2020-2025 Table 5: Other Development Trip Generation 2020-2025 with Pass-By Trips ATTACHMENT 2: FOLLOW-UP EMAIL 10/26/16 V:\PROJECTS\HILW\1604-Hillwood Whitehall\CORRES\SENT\OTHER\scoping\Pennoni_Hillwood Whitehall_TIA RevScoping20161031_FrederickCo.doc SIGNED: _________________________________ DATE: ______________ Applicant or Consultant PRINT NAME: _____________________________ Applicant or Consultant 190 191 33A-A-3424-A-1124-A-1024-A-924-A-9 SEC 724-A-7 SEC 924-A-224-A-1400.00' OF 8" SDR-26 @ 0.00%378.65' OF 8" SDR-26 @ 0.00%400.00' OF 8" SDR-26 @ 0.00%400.00' OF 8" SDR-26 @ 0.00%170.45' OF 8" SDR-26 @ 0.00%21 3 . 4 6 ' O F 8 " S D R - 2 6 @ 0 . 0 0% 20 2 .9 0 ' OF 8 " SDR -2 6 @ 0 . 00%49.50' OF 6" SDR-26 @ 0.00%49.50' OF 6" SDR-26 @ 0.00%44.50' OF 6" SDR-26 @ 0.00%15.00'570.00'1782.00'26.00'10.00'22.00'20.00'TYP.9.00'TYP.9.00'TYP.20.00'TYP.R4.5'TYP.15.00'R4.5'TYP.25'R25'R25'R12.00'22.00'15.00'20.00'20.00'18.00'15.00' FROMBACK OF CURB55.00'55.00'12.00'12.00'50 SPACES48 SPACES161 SPACES80.00'55.00'66.00'15.00'36.00'12.00'55.00'12.00'12.00'55.00'55.00'30 SPACES27 SPACES27 SPACES34 SPACES12.00'55.00'80.00'66.00'80.00'74.00'74.00'80.00'80.00'R4.5'TYP.9.00'15.00'15.00' FROMBACK OF CURB15.50' FROMBACK OF CURB26.00'7 SPACES25'R8'R25'R3'R22.00'26.00'26.00'26.00'22.00'22.00'20.00'TYP.9.00 'TYP.8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'R8'RR4.5'TYP.8 SPACES8 SPACES12 SPACES12 SPACES12 SPACES12 SPACES12 SPACES8 SPACES9 SPACES8 SPACES12 SPACES8 SPACES9 SPACES2 SPACES8 SPACES5 SPACES7 SPACES9 SPACES6 SPACES8 SPACES3 SPACES10 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES18 SPACES5 SPACES12 SPACES20'R3'R3'R10'R3'R2'R20'R3'R3'R3'R3'R8'R8'R8'R8'R18 SPACES18 SPACES3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R3'R8'R8'R18 SPACES3'R3'R3'R8'R10'R3'R39 SPACES40 SPACES18 SPACES17 SPACES20'R3'R2'R20'R3'R3'R8'R3'R27 SPACES27 SPACES40 SPACES20'R3'R3'R3'R3'R10'R3'R3'R20'R27 SPACES27 SPACES3'R8'R10'R3'R32 SPACES33 SPACES20'R3'R2'R20'R3'R8'R3'R20'R10'R3'R11 SPACES20'R2'R9 SPACES40 SPACES3'R8'R8'R40 SPACES8'R3'R8'R3'R8'R8'R3'R40 SPACES8'R3'R8'R3'R3'R41 SPACES3'R8'R8'R3'R41 SPACES8'R3'R3'R8'R36.00'3'R8'R33 SPACES8'R33 SPACES3'R8'R8'R3'R3'R3'R8'R8'R3'R8'R3'R8'R3'R10 SPACES10 SPACES8'R3'R3'R8'R3'R40 SPACES8'R8'R3'R8'R3'R30'R40 SPACES26.00'26.00'36.00'22.00'26.00'34.00'FC TO FC8'R3'R41 SPACES3'R25'R8'R3'R33 SPACES4.5'R10 SPACES26.00'22.00'26.00'26.00'22.00'22.00'22.00'22.00'30.00'22.00'22.00'22.00'22.00'15'R48'R15'R4.5'R5' WALKWAY5' WALKWAY5' WALKWAY5' WALKWAY5' WALKWAY40.00'15.00'30'R30'R15.00'80.00'15.00'30'R35'R12.00 '25'R50'R50'R80.01'25'R41 FUTURE SPACES14 FUTURE SPACES18 FUTURE SPACES30.00'80'R50'R80.00'9.00'9.00 '9.00 '20.00'20.00'9.00'36.00 '36.00'55.00'20.00'20.00'9.00'12.00'282 FUTURE TRAILER SPACES55.00'40 FUTURE SPACES15.00'12.00'55.00'64 SPACES18 FUTURE SPACES64 SPACES64 SPACES12.00'55.00'10.00'36.00'110'R56 SPACES15 SPACES19 SPACES79 SPACES8 SPACES12.00'101 SPACES188 FUTURE TRAILER SPACES40 FUTURE SPACES80.00'40 FUTURE SPACES6 FUTURESPACES40 FUTURE SPACES12 FUTURE SPACES6 FUTURESPACES36.00'30.00'55.00'12 FUTURE SPACES25'R12 FUTURE SPACES12 FUTURE SPACES12 FUTURE SPACES8 FUTURE SPACES8 FUTURE SPACES12 FUTURE SPACES12 FUTURE SPACES12 FUTURE SPACES35'R30.00'10'R50'R25'R50'R10'R50'R25'R10'R10'R18'R50'R50'R168.00'30.00'26.00'22.00'SECURITYFENCE180'R80.00'135'RSECURITYFENCESECURITYFENCE23.00'32.00'31.82'50'R36.00'250.00'25'R12.00'25'R12.00'50'R10'R25'R12.00 '50'R50'R10'R25'R80'R50'R25'R40.00'36.00'50'R50'R40'RR290.00'200.00'200.00'350.00'12.00'12.00'36.00'12.00'12.00'12.00'443'12.00'12.00'12.00'25' PARKING SETBACK75.00'350.00'12.00'12.00'10'R10'R12.00'55.00'12.00'55.00'10'R10'R6.75'R6.75'R6.75'R6.75'R6.75'RCONC.RAMPCONC.RAMP3 SPACES2 SPACES33.00'53.00'FIRETANK3" METERAND VAULT4" CL52 DIP8" CL52 DIP WATERMAIN "A"4" CL52 DIP1-8"X4" TEE1-4" VALVE1-8" VALVE1-8"X8" TEE3-8" VALVE8" CL52 DIP WATERMAIN "A"1-8"X8" TEE3-8" VALVESCALE: 1"=80'192 193 194 195 Non Sortable FC - Non Peak Season Cars Trucks Totsl Average Weekday - Non Peak Average Weekday - Non Peak Average Weekday - Non Peak Headcount - Day Shift 484 Headcount Night Shift 484 Start End Day Shift Inbound 7:00:00 AM 5:30:00 PM Day Shift Outbound 7:30:00 AM 6:00:00 PM Night Shift Inbound 6:00:00 PM 4:30:00 AM Night Shift Outbound 6:30:00 AM 5:00:00 AM In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 00:00 2 2 4 00:00 4 2 6 00:00 6 4 10 01:00 2 2 4 01:00 1 3 4 01:00 3 5 8 02:00 2 2 4 02:00 0 0 0 02:00 2 2 4 03:00 2 2 4 03:00 1 1 2 03:00 3 3 6 04:00 5 242 247 04:00 0 0 0 04:00 5 242 247 05:00 29 242 271 05:00 1 0 1 05:00 30 242 272 06:00 227 2 229 06:00 0 1 1 06:00 227 3 230 07:00 227 2 229 07:00 4 3 7 07:00 231 5 236 08:00 7 7 14 08:00 6 5 11 08:00 13 12 25 09:00 7 7 14 09:00 6 8 14 09:00 13 15 28 10:00 7 7 14 10:00 6 6 12 10:00 13 13 26 11:00 7 7 14 11:00 5 6 11 11:00 12 13 25 12:00 15 15 30 12:00 5 6 11 12:00 20 21 41 13:00 7 7 14 13:00 6 0 6 13:00 13 7 20 14:00 7 7 14 14:00 10 8 18 14:00 17 15 32 15:00 7 7 14 15:00 6 8 14 15:00 13 15 28 16:00 7 7 14 16:00 6 8 14 16:00 13 15 28 17:00 242 242 484 17:00 3 5 8 17:00 245 247 492 18:00 242 242 484 18:00 5 4 9 18:00 247 246 493 19:00 2 2 4 19:00 4 3 7 19:00 6 5 11 20:00 2 2 4 20:00 5 4 9 20:00 7 6 13 21:00 2 2 4 21:00 3 4 7 21:00 5 6 11 22:00 2 2 4 22:00 1 2 3 22:00 3 4 7 23:00 2 2 4 23:00 1 2 3 23:00 3 4 7 1,061 1,061 2,122 89 89 178 1,150 1,150 2,300 196 Non Sortable FC - Peak Season Cars Trucks Totsl Average Weekday - Non Peak Average Weekday - Non Peak Average Weekday - Non Peak Headcount - Day Shift 801 Headcount Night Shift 801 Start End Day Shift Inbound 7:00:00 AM 5:30:00 PM Day Shift Outbound 7:30:00 AM 6:00:00 PM Night Shift Inbound 6:00:00 PM 4:30:00 AM Night Shift Outbound 6:30:00 AM 5:00:00 AM In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total 00:00 4 3 7 00:00 8 5 13 00:00 12 8 20 01:00 4 3 7 01:00 4 6 10 01:00 8 9 17 02:00 4 4 8 02:00 8 4 12 02:00 12 8 20 03:00 4 4 8 03:00 2 8 10 03:00 6 12 18 04:00 8 401 409 04:00 3 3 6 04:00 11 404 415 05:00 48 401 449 05:00 3 3 6 05:00 51 404 455 06:00 376 4 380 06:00 4 5 9 06:00 380 9 389 07:00 376 4 380 07:00 1 3 4 07:00 377 7 384 08:00 12 12 24 08:00 4 2 6 08:00 16 14 30 09:00 12 12 24 09:00 8 10 18 09:00 20 22 42 10:00 12 12 24 10:00 7 10 17 10:00 19 22 41 11:00 12 12 24 11:00 8 7 15 11:00 20 19 39 12:00 24 24 48 12:00 12 7 19 12:00 36 31 67 13:00 12 12 24 13:00 15 13 28 13:00 27 25 52 14:00 12 12 24 14:00 13 16 29 14:00 25 28 53 15:00 12 12 24 15:00 4 8 12 15:00 16 20 36 16:00 12 12 24 16:00 10 4 14 16:00 22 16 38 17:00 401 401 802 17:00 12 11 23 17:00 413 412 825 18:00 401 401 802 18:00 15 11 26 18:00 416 412 828 19:00 4 4 8 19:00 6 12 18 19:00 10 16 26 20:00 4 4 8 20:00 3 3 6 20:00 7 7 14 21:00 4 4 8 21:00 9 7 16 21:00 13 11 24 22:00 4 4 8 22:00 7 6 13 22:00 11 10 21 23:00 4 4 8 23:00 2 4 6 23:00 6 8 14 1,766 1,766 3,532 168 168 336 1,934 1,934 3,868 197 Hillwood Whitehall TABLE 1: TRIP GENERATION Rev. October 2016 ITE Land Use (1)AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY CODE CODE DENSITY Var.USE IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL (2-way) AVERAGE PEAK SEASON USE (3) SHORT-TERM 152 152.110 1016.080 ksf Proposed Distribution Ctr (Non-Peak Season) 380 9 389 416 412 828 3,868 Heavy Vehicles 4 3 7 15 11 26 178 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1%33%2%4%3%3%5% 110 110.310 0.000 ksf (4)General Light Industrial (e)0 0 0 (e)0 0 0 0 1016.080 ksf Total Trips 380 9 389 416 412 828 3,868 ALTERNATIVE PEAK SEASON USE (3) LONG-TERM 152 152.110 1016.080 ksf Proposed Distribution Ctr (Peak Season) 380 9 389 416 412 828 3,868 Heavy Vehicles 4 3 7 15 11 26 336 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1%33%2%4%3%3%9% 110 110.310 216.900 ksf (4)General Light Industrial (e)209 28 237 (e)33 244 277 1,512 1232.980 ksf Total Trips 589 37 626 449 656 1,105 5,380 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily (2-way)% Inbound (2-way)% Inbound Weekday 152 Proposed Distribution Ctr (Peak Season) ksf 0.38 98%0.81 50%3.81 110 General Light Industrial ksf 1.09 88%1.28 12%6.97 TRIP RATE SOURCE: Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition), Institute of Transportation Engineers; 2012. (1) ITE Land Code shown as the first 3 digits. Decimal shown for internal use by Pennoni for lookup table for trip rate variable. (2) Effective trip rates calculated by land use: For average rates = (Density) x (ave. trip rate) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In For ITE equations, "e" noted = (Density) x ( trip equation) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In (3) Site trips based on client estimates by hour. Compared to ITE averages, see Table 3. (4) long-term uses southwest of Business Boulevard. Effective Trip Rate (2) Site Pennoni HILW1604 Hillwood Whitehall TIA_Rev.xls 198 Hillwod Whitehall TABLE 2: VDOT GROWTH TRENDS Revised October 2016 Annual 3 YR 5 YR 10 YR Annual 3 YR 5 YR 10 YR 2015 47,000 4.4%3.0%1.3%1.4%2015 48,000 4.3%2.9%1.3%1.3% 2014 45,000 4.7%1.5%1.9%1.2%2014 46,000 4.5%2.3%1.8%1.2% 2013 43,000 0.0%-0.8%1.0%1.0%2013 44,000 0.0%-0.7%0.9%1.2% 2012 43,000 0.0%1.6%1.0%1.2%2012 44,000 2.3%1.6%0.9%1.5% 2011 43,000 -2.3%1.6%1.0%2011 43,000 -4.4%0.8%0.5% 2010 44,000 7.3%2.4%1.4%2010 45,000 7.1%2.3%1.4% 2009 41,000 0.0%0.0%0.5%2009 42,000 0.0%0.0%0.5% 2008 41,000 0.0%0.0%1.0%2008 42,000 0.0%0.0%1.5% 2007 41,000 0.0%0.8%1.5%2007 42,000 0.0%0.8%2.0% 2006 41,000 0.0%1.7%2006 42,000 0.0%2.5% 2005 41,000 2.5%2.6%2005 42,000 2.4%3.4% 2004 40,000 2.6%2004 41,000 5.1% 2003 39,000 2.6%2003 39,000 2.6% 2002 38,000 2002 38,000 1.7%1.3%1.2%1.2%1.9%1.4%1.2%1.3% Annual 3 YR 5 YR 10 YR Annual 3 YR 5 YR 10 YR 2015 4,800 4.3%3.7%1.3%-1.2%2015 5,000 4.2%3.6%0.8%-1.1% 2014 4,600 7.0%2.3%0.4%0.2%2014 4,800 6.7%2.2%0.4%0.4% 2013 4,300 0.0%-1.5%-0.5%0.0%2013 4,500 0.0%-2.1%-0.4%0.2% 2012 4,300 0.0%-1.5%-4.8%0.2%2012 4,500 0.0%-1.4%-4.6%0.7% 2011 4,300 -4.4%-0.8%-4.8%2011 4,500 -6.3%-0.7%-4.6% 2010 4,500 0.0%-6.5%-3.6%2010 4,800 2.1%-5.6%-3.0% 2009 4,500 2.3%-6.5%0.0%2009 4,700 2.2%-6.2%0.4% 2008 4,400 -20.0%-6.6%0.5%2008 4,600 -19.3%-6.3%0.9% 2007 5,500 0.0%6.9%5.5%2007 5,700 0.0%7.4%6.3% 2006 5,500 1.9%8.6%2006 5,700 1.8%9.0% 2005 5,400 20.0%8.7%2005 5,600 21.7%10.1% 2004 4,500 4.7%2004 4,600 4.5% 2003 4,300 2.4%2003 4,400 4.8% 2002 4,200 2002 4,200 1.4%0.6%-0.7%-0.2%1.7%0.9%-0.4%0.1% SOURCE:VDOT, Traffic Engineering Division, Daily Traffic Volume Estimates. Avg Growth Rates: AADT Effective Growth Rates YEAR AAWDT Effective Growth Rates Interstate 81 Rest Church Rd (Route 669) to West Virginia State Line YEAR Route 11 (Martinsburg Pike) Cedar Hill Rd (Route 671) to West Virginia State Line YEAR AADT Effective Growth Rates YEAR AAWDT Effective Growth Rates Avg Growth Rates: Pennoni HILW1604 Hillwood Whitehall_VDOT Growth Trends.xlsx 199 Hillwood Whitehall TABLE 3: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON Rev. October 2016 ITE Land Use (1)AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY CODE CODE DENSITY Var.USE IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL (2-way) AVERAGE PEAK SEASON USE (3) SHORT-TERM 152 152.110 1016.080 ksf Proposed Distribution Ctr (Non-Peak Season) 380 9 389 416 412 828 3,868 Heavy Vehicles 4 3 7 5 4 9 178 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1%33%2%1%1%1%5% 110 110.310 0.000 ksf (4)General Light Industrial (e)0 0 0 (e)0 0 0 0 1016.080 ksf Total Trips 380 9 389 416 412 828 3,868 PEAK SEASON USE (3) LONG-TERM 152 152.110 1016.080 ksf Proposed Distribution Ctr (Peak Season) 380 9 389 416 412 828 3,868 Heavy Vehicles 4 3 7 15 11 26 336 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1%33%2%4%3%3%9% 110 110.310 216.900 ksf (4)General Light Industrial (e)209 28 237 (e)33 244 277 1,512 1232.980 ksf Total Trips 589 37 626 449 656 1,105 5,380 ITE EMPLOYMENT RANGES 152 152.100 1016.080 ksf High-Cube Ware/Dist Ctr 77 35 112 38 84 122 1,707 152 152.110 1016.080 ksf e High-Cube Ware/Dist Ctr 81 36 117 40 88 128 1,707 152 152.800 1016.080 ksf High-Cube Dist Ctr+ 1 SD 308 139 447 148 330 478 2,185 150 150.110 1016.080 ksf e Warehousing 233 62 295 66 197 263 3,617 140 140.200 1016.080 ksf Manufacturing 579 163 742 267 475 742 3,881 150 150.180 968 emp Warehouse @ 968 emp.297 116 413 169 315 484 3,061 140 140.180 968 emp Manufacturing @ 968 emp 270 100 370 266 473 739 1,940 PEAK SEASON USE (3) Difference from ITE Equations 299 -27 272 376 324 700 2,161 Percentage Difference 369%-75%232%940%368%547%127% Difference from ITE average + 1 St. Deviation 72 -130 -58 268 82 350 1,683 Percentage Difference 23%-94%-13%181%25%73%77% AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily (2-way)% Inbound (2-way)% Inbound Weekday 152 Proposed Distribution Ctr (Peak Season) ksf 0.38 98%0.81 50%3.81 152 High-Cube Ware/Dist Ctr ksf 0.11 69%0.12 31%1.68 152 High-Cube Ware/Dist Ctr ksf 0.12 69%0.13 31%1.68 152 High-Cube Dist Ctr+ 1 SD ksf 0.44 69%0.47 31%2.15 150 Warehousing ksf 0.29 79%0.26 25%3.56 140 Manufacturing ksf 0.73 78%0.73 36%3.82 150 Warehouse @ 968 emp.emp 0.43 72%0.50 35%3.16 140 Manufacturing @ 968 emp emp 0.38 73%0.76 36%2.00 TRIP RATE SOURCE: Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition), Institute of Transportation Engineers; 2012. (1) ITE Land Code shown as the first 3 digits. Decimal shown for internal use by Pennoni for lookup table for trip rate variable. (2) Effective trip rates calculated by land use: For average rates = (Density) x (ave. trip rate) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In For ITE equations, "e" noted = (Density) x ( trip equation) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In (3) Site trips based on client estimates by hour, see attachment 1. Compared to ITE averages. Site trips based on client estimates. (4) long-term uses southwest of Business Boulevard. Site Comparisons Effective Trip Rate (2) Pennoni HILW1604 Hillwood Whitehall TIA_Rev.xls 200 Hillwood Whitehall TABLE 4: OTHER SITE TRIP GENERATION Rev. October 2016 ITE Land Use (1)AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY CODE CODE DENSITY Var.USE IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL (2-way) Aikens-Claytor Parcel (2020 & 2025)* 853 853.100 10 f. pos.Convenience w/ Gas 83 83 166 96 95 191 5,426 853 853.200 5.313 ksf Convenience w/ Gas 109 108 217 136 135 271 4,493 934 934.400 2.596 ksf FF w/ Drive-thru 60 58 118 44 41 85 1,288 310 310.110 82.000 room Hotel 25 18 43 25 24 49 670 Subtotal 194 184 378 205 200 405 6,451 Arogas Parcel (2025)* 820 820.210 22.570 ksf Shopping Ctr @ 22,570 gsf 39 24 63 106 115 221 2,581 Light Property Parcel (2020, 2025) 110 110.200 105.500 ksf General Light Industrial 85 12 97 12 90 102 735 SW Parcel 12 (2025) 110 110.200 150.000 ksf General Light Industrial 121 17 138 18 128 146 1,046 NW Parcel 12C, 1 (2025)* 820 820.250 13.000 ksf Shopping Ctr @ 13,000 gsf 28 17 45 73 80 153 1,803 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily (2-way)% Inbound (2-way)% Inbound Weekday 853 Convenience w/ Gas f. pos.16.60 50%19.10 50%542.60 853 Convenience w/ Gas ksf 40.84 50%51.01 50%845.66 934 FF w/ Drive-thru ksf 45.45 51%32.74 52%496.15 310 Hotel room 0.52 58%0.60 51%8.17 110 General Light Industrial ksf 0.92 88%0.97 12%6.97 110 General Light Industrial ksf 0.92 88%0.97 12%6.97 820 Shopping Center (Ave)ksf 0.96 62%3.71 48%42.70 820 Shopping Ctr @ 22,570 gsf ksf 2.79 62%9.79 48%114.35 820 Shopping Ctr @ 13,000 gsf ksf 3.46 62%11.77 48%138.69 * Assumed to include pass-by. ** Shown for comparison only. Not included in totals. TRIP RATE SOURCE: Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition), Institute of Transportation Engineers; 2012. Average trip rates used, unless noted with "e", then equations used at size shown, with data set OK for R2 > .0.75 AND SD > 110% of ave. (1) ITE Land Code shown as the first 3 digits. Decimal shown for internal use by Pennoni for lookup table for trip rate variable. (2) Effective trip rates calculated by land use: For average rates = (Density) x (ave. trip rate) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In For ITE equations, "e" noted = (Density) x ( trip equation) = 2-way Trips ; x (inbound percentage) for Trips In Other Background Developments 2020 and 2025 Effective Trip Rates (2) ** Pennoni HILW1604 Hillwood Whitehall TIA.xls 201 Hillwood Whitehall TABLE 5: OTHER SITE TRIP GENERATION W/ PASS-BY TRIPS Rev. October 2016 ITE Land Use (1)AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR DAILY CODE CODE DENSITY Var.USE IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL (2-way) Aikens-Claytor Parcel (2020 & 2025)* 853 853.100 10 f. pos.Convenience w/ Gas 83 83 166 96 95 191 5,426 853 853.200 5.313 ksf Convenience w/ Gas 109 108 217 136 135 271 4,493 934 934.400 2.596 ksf FF w/ Drive-thru 60 58 118 44 41 85 1,288 310 310.110 82.000 room Hotel 25 18 43 25 24 49 670 Subtotal (2)194 184 378 205 200 405 6,451 AM PM Daily Trip reductions (3) COMM. USE 63%66%45%LUC 853 Pass-by Trips (4)68 68 136 89 89 178 2,022 COMM. USE 49%50%25%LUC 934 Pass-by Trips (5)28 28 56 21 21 42 322 Total Pass-By Trips 96 96 192 110 110 220 2,344 Total External Trips 98 88 186 95 90 185 4,107 Percentage External 49%46%64% Arogas Parcel (2025)* 820 820.210 22.570 ksf Shopping Ctr @ 22,570 gsf 39 24 63 106 115 221 2,581 AM PM Daily Trip reductions (3) COMM. USE 15%34%15%LUC 820 Pass-by Trips (6)4 4 8 36 36 72 387 Total External Trips 35 20 55 70 79 149 2,194 Percentage External 87%67%85% Light Property Parcel (2020, 2025) 110 110.200 105.500 ksf General Light Industrial 85 12 97 12 90 102 735 SW Parcel 12 (2025) 110 110.200 150.000 ksf General Light Industrial 121 17 138 18 128 146 1,046 NW Parcel 12C, 1 (2025)* 820 820.250 13.000 ksf Shopping Ctr @ 13,000 gsf 28 17 45 73 80 153 1,803 AM PM Daily Trip reductions (3) COMM. USE 15%34%15%LUC 820 Pass-by Trips (6)3 3 6 25 25 50 270 Total External Trips 25 14 39 48 55 103 1,533 Percentage External 87%67%85% * Assumed to include pass-by. ** Shown for comparison only. Not included in totals. TRIP RATE SOURCE: Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition), Institute of Transportation Engineers; 2012. Average trip rates used, unless noted with "e", then equations used at size shown, with data set OK for R2 > .0.75 AND SD > 110% of ave. (1) ITE Land Code shown as the first 3 digits. Decimal shown for internal use by Pennoni for lookup table for trip rate variable. (2) See Table 4 for effective trip rates calculated by land use: (3) Internal Trips not assumed. Other Background Developments 2020 and 2025 with Pass-By Trips (4) Pass-by Uses default to 45% for Daily conditions, less than AM and PM peak hour rates, since no ITE data provided. (5) Pass-by Uses default to 25% Daily conditions for highway oriented uses, since no ITE data provided. (6) Pass-by Uses default to 15% for AM and Daily conditions, use up to 15% per VDOT practice, since no ITE data provided. ** Pennoni HILW1604 Hillwood Whitehall TIA.xls 202 1 Douglas R. Kennedy From:Ronald A. Mislowsky Sent:Wednesday, October 26, 2016 5:53 PM To:Smith, Matthew, P.E. (matthew.smith@vdot.virginia.gov); Jeffery A. Lineberry (Jeff.Lineberry@VDOT.Virginia.gov); Short, Terry (VDOT); Lloyd Ingram (Lloyd.Ingram@VDOT.Virginia.gov) Cc:Douglas R. Kennedy; sean.obrien@hillwood.com Subject:Whitehall Commerce trip generation Gentlemen, At the meeting to finalize the scoping for the TIA required at Whitehall Commerce Center, the question concerning the source of the trip generation numbers came up again. I have talked to my client about this and can report the following. The user operates many of these same size and type facilities all over the United States, and so has experience with the issues involved in getting their employees in and out of these operations in a timely basis. The numbers that were presented represent a conservative estimate of the actual traffic generation based on their experience at the other sites. Apparently they have experience problems in the past getting employees in and out of their sites efficiently. They want to make sure that the transportation planning for this new construction project takes into account a real world scenario. Additionally the breakdown of employee in and out trips represent how they best see the shifts actually changing. This is their best estimate of how traffic will actually flow. This user is as interested in getting their folks in and out of the parking lot as expeditiously as possible and they provide generation numbers to make sure that happens. Why else would they volunteer numbers that are twice the rate as the typical hi cube warehouse? Concerning the service area, unfortunately these larger item centers do not work in quite the same way as the ones handling the smaller items. These deliveries could be almost anywhere, even to another warehouse. They did agree that almost all of the trucks will be going to I-81 and that the 50%-50% split was as good an estimate as they could provide. I hope that addresses those two concerns to VDOTs satisfaction. Matt, can you let me know if this information is indeed adequate or of there are additional questions on trip generation and distribution? Doug will be sending the revised scoping. Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com 203 1 Wan Chong From:Ronald A. Mislowsky Sent:Wednesday, November 09, 2016 11:10 AM To:Reed, Brad (VDOT); Douglas R. Kennedy Cc:Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Short, Terry (VDOT); Sean O'Brien (sean.obrien@hillwood.com); Wan Chong Subject:RE: Whitehall TIA Brad, This appears reasonable and we will proceed as you have suggested. Thanks for getting back to us so quickly. Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com From: Reed, Brad (VDOT) [mailto:Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 4:05 PM To: Douglas R. Kennedy <dkennedy@Pennoni.com>; Ronald A. Mislowsky <RMislowsky@Pennoni.com> Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) <Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov>; Campbell, Adam (VDOT) <AdamF.Campbell@vdot.virginia.gov>; Short, Terry (VDOT) <Terry.ShortJR@VDOT.Virginia.gov>; Sean O'Brien (sean.obrien@hillwood.com) <sean.obrien@hillwood.com>; Wan Chong <WChong@Pennoni.com> Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA Doug, This is very helpful information, thank you. In considering the 15 minute in+out volume & PHFs (summarized below) along with the Mr. Fuel count data, we concluded the following: a) the peak hour of site traffic is 1730-1830 with a peak hour factor of 0.82, b) site traffic has a clear drop-off, but the peak extends over a 1.5 hour period so has potential for peak spreading, c) the peak hour of adjacent street traffic is 1645-1745 (counts were collected from 1600-1800), and d) the public cannot guarantee that the window of site arrivals and departures will occur exactly as presented. Site Trip Summary: Time Volume Rolling PHF 17:00 102 17:15 180 17:30 300 17:45 220 0.67 18:00 222 0.77 18:15 240 0.82 18:30 240 0.96 18:45 100 0.84 204 2 Given these findings, we recommend that the PM peak model scenario be developed by combining volumes from the 1645-1745 peak hour of the adjacent street and the 1730-1830 peak hour of site trips with PHF of 0.82 (highlighted above). For non-site associated movements, the PHF would be calculated from the count data as per the VDOT TOSAM. Further, we would like to preserve the language recommended in my previous email regarding sensitivity testing: “The draft build model will be submitted to VDOT for review to determine the suitability of this methodology and possibly to test alternative methodologies. VDOT will collaborate with the consultant on these findings and will make a final determination on the approach to be used in the study.” This review will also provide for a collaborative validation of the model programming prior to finalizing the report, thus saving time having to correct potential issues in a report revision should there be a discrepancy. Please let us know if you concur with this methodology and thank you for the productive dialog on scoping this complex project. Thanks, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Douglas R. Kennedy [mailto:dkennedy@Pennoni.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 1:19 PM To: Reed, Brad (VDOT); Ronald A. Mislowsky Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Short, Terry (VDOT); Sean O'Brien (sean.obrien@hillwood.com); Wan Chong Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA Brad: In reviewing the capacity for 15 minute peaks for employees with the owner, Pennoni suggests the following methodology to verify peak hour factors. This approach was used to develop a potential peak rate for the PM peak in the updated scoping. However, based on VDOT comments and input from the client on how may people can be processed through security, we have looked at a range of peak hour factors. The attached worksheet shows the inbound and outbound potential arrivals/departures in 15 minute increments and calculates an effective peak hour factor (hour/(4* peak 15) for the employee trips. The 15 minute arrivals and departures are shown in the top 2 rows for the 5 -6 PM and 6 – 7 PM peak hours, with the peak seasonal use (Nov – December) use at 801 employees in the night shift. The max 15 minutes is between 240 and 300 person trips total or 0.67 to 0.84 peak hour factor. We had suggested 0.70 in the default calcs. Please review and let us know if this clarifies the calculations and suggested methodology Thanks 205 3 Douglas R. Kennedy, PE Associate Vice President Pennoni 13880 Dulles Corner Lane, Suite 100 | Herndon, VA 20171 Direct: 703-840-4830 | Mobile: 703-851-6236 www.pennoni.com | dkennedy@Pennoni.com From: Reed, Brad (VDOT) [mailto:Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 1:00 PM To: Ronald A. Mislowsky Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Short, Terry (VDOT); Douglas R. Kennedy Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA Will do. Thank you, Ron. Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Ronald A. Mislowsky [mailto:RMislowsky@Pennoni.com] Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 12:41 PM To: Reed, Brad (VDOT) Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Short, Terry (VDOT) Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA Brad, I have copied Doug Kennedy on this email. Can you also copy him on the TIA review questions since he needs to weigh in. I am checking with the client to see if we can get a breakdown as to how the shift change is accomplished. Thanks for getting back quickly on this review. Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com From: Reed, Brad (VDOT) [mailto:Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:12 AM To: Ronald A. Mislowsky <RMislowsky@Pennoni.com> Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) <Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov>; Campbell, Adam (VDOT) <AdamF.Campbell@vdot.virginia.gov>; Short, Terry (VDOT) <Terry.ShortJR@VDOT.Virginia.gov> Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA 206 4 Ron, In looking over your latest scoping form for the Whitehall site, we noticed that you’ve proposed to use a 0.7 peak hour factor as a proxy for the unknown level of “peakiness” that may be experienced with such a large number shift change. Given the custom trip generation showing a peak extending over 2 hours for all shift changes and the unavailability of 15 minute granularity, we propose that the scope be modified on this point. We propose that note 7 in the ‘OTHER NOTES’ section be changed as follows: “… Additional information will be requested of the property owner to break down employee activities within the two- hour shift change period. To account for peak arrivals during shift changes, a peak hour factor of 0.7 with a 15-minute analysis period will be used for all site passenger cars in a 1-hour simulation scenario. The draft build model will be submitted to VDOT for review to determine the suitability of this methodology and possibly to test alternative methodologies. VDOT will collaborate with the consultant on these findings and will make a final determination on the approach to be used in the study.” To better represent real-world conditions rather than shooting in the dark, do you believe the client could provide additional information on how employees are released within the two-hour shift change window? We’ve brainstormed on an idea to use a higher peak hour factor with a 2-hour simulation scenario, where the peak hour factor is applied to more than one 15-minute period. This may reflect the peak hour spreading over the two-hour shift change period better than applying a mass traffic assault to a single 15-minute period, but this all depends on how the clock in-clock out procedures will function at the site. Thanks, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Ronald A. Mislowsky [mailto:RMislowsky@Pennoni.com] Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 5:05 PM To: Reed, Brad (VDOT) Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT) Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA Brad, Thank you very much. Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com 207 5 From: Reed, Brad (VDOT) [mailto:Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 5:01 PM To: Ronald A. Mislowsky <RMislowsky@Pennoni.com> Cc: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) <Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov>; Campbell, Adam (VDOT) <AdamF.Campbell@vdot.virginia.gov> Subject: RE: Whitehall TIA Ron, Attached are the timing sheets for the three intersections. Apologies for the delay in getting back to you with these. Thanks, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 2:23 PM To: Reed, Brad (VDOT) Subject: FW: Whitehall TIA Brad, Can you get this to Ron? Thanks, Matt Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer VDOT - Land Development Clarke, Frederick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 Phone # (540) 984-5615 Fax # (540) 984-5607 From: Ronald A. Mislowsky [mailto:RMislowsky@Pennoni.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:23 AM To: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Short, Terry (VDOT) Subject: Whitehall TIA We should be sending out the updated Scoping document this morning. At the meeting last week VDOT agreed to provide the signal timing for the three rest church road signals. How long will it take to get that information together? Thanks, 208 6 Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com PARTNERS FOR WHAT'S POSSIBLE 209 1 Wan Chong From:Reed, Brad (VDOT) <Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov> Sent:Friday, December 02, 2016 5:07 PM To:Douglas R. Kennedy; Ronald A. Mislowsky; Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us); Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Wan Chong Subject:RE: Whitehall Commerce Center ADVANCED Synchro files Attachments:Whitehall_VDOT_Validation-Notes-120216.pdf Doug & Ron, Thank you for the detailed preliminary submission. Please find attached a draft set of VDOT’s recommendations, which we can discuss in more detail when we meet. In the meantime, we would be glad to help answer any questions you may have about our comments. Thanks and have a good weekend, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Douglas R. Kennedy [mailto:dkennedy@Pennoni.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 5:12 PM To: Reed, Brad (VDOT); Ronald A. Mislowsky; Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us); Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Wan Chong Subject: RE: Whitehall Commerce Center ADVANCED Synchro files Brad and all: Thanks for the input and the direction. Based on your comments, we have provided draft synchro scenarios for the following for the Whitehall vicinity fort the 2020 and 2025 conditions. In addition to the base files, we have initiated some potential mitigation improvements based on our review of the simtraffic runs from the future build conditions. These are draft, subject to further qc and agency review. Synchro and simtraffic files provided (for both AM and PM peak) 1. 2020 No-Build AM/PM labelled as NO-BUILD 2020 2. 2020 Build AM/PM with no mitigation (except timing with 4 leg on Business Blvd at Rte. 11) BUILD 2020 3. 2020 with mitigation (timing changes at I-81) BUILD 2020 IMPRVD 4. 2025 Build AM/PM with no mitigation (except for timing at Rte 11 with 4th leg) BUILD 2025 5. 2025 w/ mitigation (with new timing at ramps, striping on east approach on rest church, and extra right turn lane SB on Rte 11, and striping on Business Blvd for shared third right /through at Rte. 11 WB, striping for center turn lane as a dedicate left only on Rte 11 NB at Rest Church Rd ) BUILD 2025 IMPRVD We have looked at the overall synchro outputs and check simraffic runs for max queues to develop the 2025 mitigations. While some movements may be at an LOS “E” in synchro , the max queues are working, with approach LOS D. 210 2 We have included the weighted peak hour factors for site use based on the methodology discussed last week for PM and used the same approach for AM peak at 0.84 for site employees. The traffic study will detail the assignments and layering for the site and other uses, but we have followed the scoping outline wit revised distributions Some quick notes: 1. We have restricted access to the site at the driveway for truck egress to right out only at main entrance (north) with channelization to parking lot to allow right out only to Business Blvd towards Rte 11 (intersection #5) Left turns allowed at middle parking lot entrance. (# 6) W have not tested a roundabout at this location. 2. Left turn lane shown for trucks EB on Woodbine to Business Blvd 3. No changes at Rte 11/Woodbine Rd intersection. 4. For the long-term volumes, the commercial entrance on Business Blvd (intersection #4) is shown as right in/out to the south, The north leg is shown in the 2025 scenario with the Arogas parcel as a right in/out only, with left turns in from Business Blvd EB.. The backups exiting the site extend into the site for exiting retail trips as rights as 1 access . There is an existing interparcel access to the north to Route 11 through the existing retail (dollar saver and deli at 4740 Martinsburg Pike), which was not included in the assignments. 5. We have reviewed the storage lanes towards I-81 and not shown improvement to deceleration lane,. For 2025, the max queue is approx.. 1125 feet for 2025 with the site, growth, and long term uses, the existing full turn lane stacking is approximately 1175 feet, with a 250 ft taper on the northbound approach. We have not extended the stacking with the VDOT improvements. 6. Most of the mitigation improvements, outside of timing, area associated with ling-term scenario. It may be worth considering rising study later in time with hi cube open impact with field numbers as part of the general industrial site plan west of Business Blvd , to verify if the added striping on Business Blvd. through to WB Rest Church should be striped. The model is assigning trips to the outside lane to go through the Route 11 signal and travel north on the I-81 ramp for peak season use, and the added retail from the adjacent commercial site may be occurring at the same time. The SB double right at Rte 11 is not site related traffic in the mitigation scenario , but it is a large volume that impact operations for existing and future conditions. Thanks, in advance, for VDOT review and comments . Please advise if you require other info for your review. Douglas R. Kennedy, PE Associate Vice President Pennoni 13880 Dulles Corner Lane, Suite 100 | Herndon, VA 20171 Direct: 703-840-4830 | Mobile: 703-851-6236 www.pennoni.com | dkennedy@Pennoni.com From: Reed, Brad (VDOT) [mailto:Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 9:10 AM To: Ronald A. Mislowsky; Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: Douglas R. Kennedy; (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us); Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT) Subject: RE: Whitehall Commerce Center Ron, 211 3 I’ll let Matt weigh in on the engineering review meeting schedule, but an in-person discussion may not be necessary to keep us moving. We can certainly work with you on an iterative and collaborative model development process, but propose to handle it a little differently: 1. Submit baseline and build-out (without mitigation) models to VDOT for validation. Depending on when this is received, we can turn it around in a few business days. 2. Following email agreement by both parties of the baseline and build out models, Pennoni develops a build scenario with recommended mitigation and submits to VDOT. Please also send a sketch to the county with the proposal for their consideration, identifying locations in need of mitigation and the before-after delays. VDOT will review the feasibility of the proposed options and, if necessary, recommend changes. Comments will be submitted to the group via email to keep all parties in the loop for feedback. 3. If needed, set up a meeting to discuss. 4. After all parties agree on mitigation approach, finalize and submit TIA. As you know, a final determination of acceptance of the TIA will be in the hands of the county with VDOT providing technical guidance. Please let us know if this works for your team (also, John – please let us know if the county has anything to add here). Our hope is that this will expedite the process and keep you on track for your client’s mid-December goal. Thanks, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Ronald A. Mislowsky [mailto:RMislowsky@Pennoni.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:29 PM To: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: Reed, Brad (VDOT); Douglas R. Kennedy; (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us) Subject: Whitehall Commerce Center Matt and Brad, Tomorrow Doug Kennedy will send the two models of the traffic at Whitehall with the eCommerce distribution center traffic added. Our client would like to know what offsite issues are out there so a decision on the project can be made in the first half of December. To that end, we would like to opportunity to meet with VDOT and discuss a mitigation approach to the areas where impacts occur upon development of the commercial areas along Rte 11 or Flying J traffic. Doug Kennedy and I were hoping that VDOT could review the models before the next engineering review meeting and we could discuss your concerns and come up with a plan then finalize the TIA. We think that this way the VDOT requirements for approval would be known as soon as possible. Is this approach possible? When is the next engineering review meeting? Thanks for your help. Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director 212 4 Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com PARTNERS FOR WHAT'S POSSIBLE 213 Whitehall Distribution Center, Frederick County, VA DRAFT Summary of VDOT TIA Synchro Validation Notes December 2, 2016 1. Verify traffic volumes throughout the network in all models. Validation of volumes in the submitted synchro models is difficult without the TIA figures identifying trip generation, background generation, distribution and pass by volumes. However, it appears the volumes provided in the models are not consistent with the growth rate and background generation as presented in the submitted scoping form (utilizing the base 2014 counts from the Mr. Fuel TIA). Peak hour trip generation also does not appear to reflect the agreed upon approach as documented in email between VDOT and consultant dated Nov. 8, 2016 (overlapping the submitted, anticipated shift change peak hour with the network peak hour). 2. PHF for the associated trip generation movements also does not appear to reflect the agreed upon approach as documented in email between VDOT and consultant dated Nov. 8, 2016 (0.82 PHF). Are the values in the model a factor of the site traffic @ PHF=0.82 and background traffic at PHF=0.88 (rural) or 0.92 (urban) per the TOSAM? 3. C-Min versus C-Max as VDOT standard for recall in a coordinated system (C-Min utilized in all models). Set all to C-Max. 4. Delete node 10 on Route 11, which is unnecessary. 5. Set OD Volumes for interstate ramps to prevent interchange “U-Turn” movements to improve simulation accuracy for the on bridge left turn queuing. Set OD Volumes for the 2020 Build alternatives Business Blvd “U-Turn” movement to consist of the exiting, right-out retail traffic (Aikens-Claytor parcel). 6. We recommend adding a separate left turn pocket on Business Blvd should be included in the 2025 models to access the Arogas parcel retail development to prevent blockage of inbound site traffic. 7. Why the SB Route 11 dual rights in the 2025 models? This seems to be an unnecessary mitigation since there is little difference in performance for one vs. two turn lanes, even with the high volume in the AM. Also, the constructability of this feature would be a challenge with the existing cemetery located to the west of Route 11. 214 8. Potential volume balancing issue on Route 11 south of Rest Church intersection, unless models assume additional access points to background developments along Route 11 (same issues / difficulties as with #1 above in determining trip generation / distribution without TIA figures). 9. In the 2025 models, there is a significant volume of site generated trips that are taking left turns from the west (Site Entrance #B) onto Business Blvd (302 in the PM). Per the concept sketch included with the scoping form, this area only consists of future parking lots. Please confirm that that all site trip generation volumes are properly coded. One of the proposed mitigation measures is to re-designate the NB exclusive right turn lane on Rt. 11 north of the Rest Church Rd intersection to be a shared thru/right. To properly represent driver preference of the continuous lane over the lane drop in the deterministic Synchro results, the lane utilization factor should be adjusted down for the NB thru approach at Rest Church Rd. We recommend that the lane utilization factor be changed to reflect a preference of the continuous lane by 70% of approach traffic. We can discuss this methodology in more detail at our meeting. Below is a demonstration of what this factor would be for the 2025 build improved scenario, in which your factor should be coded as 0.71: 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈.𝐹𝐹𝐿𝐿𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 (2025 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑏𝑏 𝑈𝑈𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑖𝑖𝐿𝐿𝑏𝑏)=𝑇𝑇𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿𝑈𝑈 𝐴𝐴𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖.𝑉𝑉𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈.(𝑁𝑁𝐹𝐹.𝐹𝐹𝑜𝑜 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 𝑥𝑥 𝐻𝐻𝑈𝑈𝐻𝐻ℎ 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 𝑉𝑉𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈.)= 3712 𝑥𝑥 (0.7 ∗371)=3712 𝑥𝑥 260 =𝟎𝟎.𝟕𝟕𝟏𝟏 10. This is minor, but the crosswalk timing at Rt. 11 @ Rest Church Rd should be adjusted slightly. The east-west crossing should have a clearance interval of 30s (106 ft / 3.5 ft/s) and the north- south crossing should have a clearance interval of 29s (101 ft / 3.5 ft/s). The walk times can be reduced to 7s each. On that note, I recommend that you ignore the pedestrian timing in your split programming if it is advantageous and let it bump out of coord when a ped call is received. Pedestrian calls are likely to be quite rare and this change will likely produce a daily operational benefit. 11. For the SB commercial entrance onto Business Blvd and the I-81N off-ramp that both back up with right turns, we recommend allowing 1 vehicle to enter the blocked intersection using the simulation settings. This may more accurately represent driver behavior under such conditions. 12. Additional mitigation needs to be considered for the I-81N off-ramp, as SimTraffic conditions (10 runs) after adjusting the ‘enter blocked intersection’ settings currently show a maximum queue of 1,666 feet. This puts traffic well into the I-81 mainline. 215 13. The NB left turn lane at Rt. 11 & Rest Church Rd is contributing to much of the delay and improving this movement would free up capacity for EB Rest Church Rd traffic, potentially lessening the I-81N ramp queue. There is currently shoulder space for a right turn into the Exxon that we could consider repurposing as an additional NB left turn lane. We can discuss this more in our meeting. 216 1 Wan Chong From:Reed, Brad (VDOT) <Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov> Sent:Thursday, December 08, 2016 4:24 PM To:Douglas R. Kennedy; Ronald A. Mislowsky Cc: (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us); Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Wan Chong; Lineberry, Jeff, PE (VDOT); Martin, Bruce (VDOT); Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Subject:RE: Whitehall Commerce Center ADVANCED Synchro files Attachments:Whitehall_VDOT_Validation-Notes-120816.pdf Doug & Ron, Please find attached our finalized comments on the Whitehall validation, which incorporates the items discussed at our meeting on Tuesday. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Douglas R. Kennedy [mailto:dkennedy@Pennoni.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 5:12 PM To: Reed, Brad (VDOT); Ronald A. Mislowsky; Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us); Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT); Wan Chong Subject: RE: Whitehall Commerce Center ADVANCED Synchro files Brad and all: Thanks for the input and the direction. Based on your comments, we have provided draft synchro scenarios for the following for the Whitehall vicinity fort the 2020 and 2025 conditions. In addition to the base files, we have initiated some potential mitigation improvements based on our review of the simtraffic runs from the future build conditions. These are draft, subject to further qc and agency review. Synchro and simtraffic files provided (for both AM and PM peak) 1. 2020 No-Build AM/PM labelled as NO-BUILD 2020 2. 2020 Build AM/PM with no mitigation (except timing with 4 leg on Business Blvd at Rte. 11) BUILD 2020 3. 2020 with mitigation (timing changes at I-81) BUILD 2020 IMPRVD 4. 2025 Build AM/PM with no mitigation (except for timing at Rte 11 with 4th leg) BUILD 2025 5. 2025 w/ mitigation (with new timing at ramps, striping on east approach on rest church, and extra right turn lane SB on Rte 11, and striping on Business Blvd for shared third right /through at Rte. 11 WB, striping for center turn lane as a dedicate left only on Rte 11 NB at Rest Church Rd ) BUILD 2025 IMPRVD We have looked at the overall synchro outputs and check simraffic runs for max queues to develop the 2025 mitigations. While some movements may be at an LOS “E” in synchro , the max queues are working, with approach LOS D. 217 2 We have included the weighted peak hour factors for site use based on the methodology discussed last week for PM and used the same approach for AM peak at 0.84 for site employees. The traffic study will detail the assignments and layering for the site and other uses, but we have followed the scoping outline wit revised distributions Some quick notes: 1. We have restricted access to the site at the driveway for truck egress to right out only at main entrance (north) with channelization to parking lot to allow right out only to Business Blvd towards Rte 11 (intersection #5) Left turns allowed at middle parking lot entrance. (# 6) W have not tested a roundabout at this location. 2. Left turn lane shown for trucks EB on Woodbine to Business Blvd 3. No changes at Rte 11/Woodbine Rd intersection. 4. For the long-term volumes, the commercial entrance on Business Blvd (intersection #4) is shown as right in/out to the south, The north leg is shown in the 2025 scenario with the Arogas parcel as a right in/out only, with left turns in from Business Blvd EB.. The backups exiting the site extend into the site for exiting retail trips as rights as 1 access . There is an existing interparcel access to the north to Route 11 through the existing retail (dollar saver and deli at 4740 Martinsburg Pike), which was not included in the assignments. 5. We have reviewed the storage lanes towards I-81 and not shown improvement to deceleration lane,. For 2025, the max queue is approx.. 1125 feet for 2025 with the site, growth, and long term uses, the existing full turn lane stacking is approximately 1175 feet, with a 250 ft taper on the northbound approach. We have not extended the stacking with the VDOT improvements. 6. Most of the mitigation improvements, outside of timing, area associated with ling-term scenario. It may be worth considering rising study later in time with hi cube open impact with field numbers as part of the general industrial site plan west of Business Blvd , to verify if the added striping on Business Blvd. through to WB Rest Church should be striped. The model is assigning trips to the outside lane to go through the Route 11 signal and travel north on the I-81 ramp for peak season use, and the added retail from the adjacent commercial site may be occurring at the same time. The SB double right at Rte 11 is not site related traffic in the mitigation scenario , but it is a large volume that impact operations for existing and future conditions. Thanks, in advance, for VDOT review and comments . Please advise if you require other info for your review. Douglas R. Kennedy, PE Associate Vice President Pennoni 13880 Dulles Corner Lane, Suite 100 | Herndon, VA 20171 Direct: 703-840-4830 | Mobile: 703-851-6236 www.pennoni.com | dkennedy@Pennoni.com From: Reed, Brad (VDOT) [mailto:Brad.Reed@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 9:10 AM To: Ronald A. Mislowsky; Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: Douglas R. Kennedy; (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us); Short, Terry (VDOT); Campbell, Adam (VDOT) Subject: RE: Whitehall Commerce Center Ron, 218 3 I’ll let Matt weigh in on the engineering review meeting schedule, but an in-person discussion may not be necessary to keep us moving. We can certainly work with you on an iterative and collaborative model development process, but propose to handle it a little differently: 1. Submit baseline and build-out (without mitigation) models to VDOT for validation. Depending on when this is received, we can turn it around in a few business days. 2. Following email agreement by both parties of the baseline and build out models, Pennoni develops a build scenario with recommended mitigation and submits to VDOT. Please also send a sketch to the county with the proposal for their consideration, identifying locations in need of mitigation and the before-after delays. VDOT will review the feasibility of the proposed options and, if necessary, recommend changes. Comments will be submitted to the group via email to keep all parties in the loop for feedback. 3. If needed, set up a meeting to discuss. 4. After all parties agree on mitigation approach, finalize and submit TIA. As you know, a final determination of acceptance of the TIA will be in the hands of the county with VDOT providing technical guidance. Please let us know if this works for your team (also, John – please let us know if the county has anything to add here). Our hope is that this will expedite the process and keep you on track for your client’s mid-December goal. Thanks, Brad _______________________________ Brad Reed | Assistant District Planner VDOT - Staunton District 811 Commerce Road Staunton, VA 24401-9029 office: 540.332.2266 fax: 540.332.2262 From: Ronald A. Mislowsky [mailto:RMislowsky@Pennoni.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:29 PM To: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) Cc: Reed, Brad (VDOT); Douglas R. Kennedy; (jbishop@co.frederick.va.us) Subject: Whitehall Commerce Center Matt and Brad, Tomorrow Doug Kennedy will send the two models of the traffic at Whitehall with the eCommerce distribution center traffic added. Our client would like to know what offsite issues are out there so a decision on the project can be made in the first half of December. To that end, we would like to opportunity to meet with VDOT and discuss a mitigation approach to the areas where impacts occur upon development of the commercial areas along Rte 11 or Flying J traffic. Doug Kennedy and I were hoping that VDOT could review the models before the next engineering review meeting and we could discuss your concerns and come up with a plan then finalize the TIA. We think that this way the VDOT requirements for approval would be known as soon as possible. Is this approach possible? When is the next engineering review meeting? Thanks for your help. Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director 219 4 Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com PARTNERS FOR WHAT'S POSSIBLE 220 Whitehall Distribution Center, Frederick County, VA Summary of VDOT TIA Synchro & Volume Validation Notes December 8, 2016 General Comments 1. A final scoping form was not received by District Planning. Was an update created after our last round of emails regarding the PHF adjustments? Volume Diagrams 2. On the volume diagrams for others, it appears that roughly 23% of the inbound and outbound trips for the Aikens-Claytor parcel are unaccounted for. It’s presumed that these would be the trips using the entrance on Route 11, but the trips are not reflected in the turning movements at the Route 11/Rest Church Rd intersection. Please include a separate volume diagram for each background development in the study along with notes on distribution assumptions. 3. Also on the diagrams for others, the Aikens-Claytor parcel is sending 60 AM/55 PM trips to Woodbine Rd to travel NB on Rt. 11 to Rest Church Rd. This does not seem like a reasonable travel assumption given a U-turn opportunity at site entrance A. As discussed in our meeting on 12/6, these trips should be depicted as using the U-turn at either site entrance A or site entrance B. This will redistribute traffic at the Rt. 11/Rest Church Rd intersection, so we should test whether the Rt. 11 NB dual-left improvement maintains the same level of efficacy for reducing the I-81N off-ramp queue. 4. In the 2025 other diagram, 87 AM/95 PM trips from the Aikens-Claytor parcel are being sunk into the industrial entrance on Business Blvd. This was discussed briefly at our meeting, but please be sure that these trips end up in a U-turn movement as described in commend 4 above rather than being sunk. 5. For the employee site trips, why are 38 AM/40 PM employees being directed to the truck entrance on Business Blvd? These employees should be using site entrance B. If this change is made, it may not be reasonable to assume that any employees will exit entrance B to Woodbine Rd, then travel Route 11 north to Rest Church Rd. 6. Volumes for the total 2020 trips with site [roads] should equal background 2020 (which includes other development sites with pass-by adjustments) plus short-term site trips, but there appear to be addition trips added on top of these volumes on certain movements (e.g. - Rt. 11/Rest Church Rd NB LT – 21 vehicles higher than expected in PM; Rt. 11/Woodbine Rd NB Thru – 35 221 vehicles lower than expected in PM). Please review these discrepancies and inform as to whether we are misunderstanding the methodology or if there are errors to correct. Synchro Models 7. As discussed at the 12/6 meeting, PHF for the movements on which site traffic is being generated should have movement-specific PHFs that reflect the agreed upon approach as documented in email between VDOT and consultant dated Nov. 8, 2016 (0.82 PHF for site traffic blended with 0.92 PHF for background traffic on the same movement). 8. C-Max is the VDOT standard for recall in a coordinated system. Change C-Min to C-Max. 9. As per meeting on 12/6, convert node 10 on Route 11 to an entrance for the strip mall. 10. Set OD Volumes for interstate ramps to prevent interchange “U-Turn” movements to improve simulation accuracy for the on bridge left turn queuing. Also, set OD Volumes for the 2020 Build alternatives Business Blvd “U-Turn” movement to consist of the exiting, right-out retail traffic (Aikens-Claytor parcel). 11. The Arogas and Aikens-parcel entrances on Business Blvd should be assumed to be right- in/right-out in all scenarios. U-turns on Business Blvd should be assumed to handle left turn ingress/egress for these sites. 12. As per 12/6 meeting, volume balancing issues on Route 11 south of the Rest Church Rd intersection are to be resolved by adding access points to background developments along Route 11 to the model. 25% of the outbound Aikens-Claytor site traffic will be assigned to the right turn onto Rt. 11, with the remaining trips using Business Blvd. The Rt. 11 access to Aikens- Claytor should be assumed to be right-in/right-out only. 13. As per 12/6 meeting, remove the proposed additional SB right turn lane at Rt. 11/Rest Church Rd, as it does not contribute to a significant efficiency improvement. 14. Adjust the crosswalk widths in the simulation settings (and general intersection locations) to ensure that all stop bars line up with the background aerial imagery, particularly on Rest Church Rd between the I-81N ramp and Rt. 11. This will prevent SimTraffic from providing more queue space than is actually available. 15. One of the proposed mitigation measures is to re-designate the NB exclusive right turn lane on Rt. 11 north of the Rest Church Rd intersection to be a shared thru/right. To properly represent driver preference of the continuous lane over the lane drop in the deterministic Synchro results, 222 the lane utilization factor should be adjusted down for the NB thru approach at Rest Church Rd. We recommend that the lane utilization factor be changed to reflect a preference of the continuous lane by 70% of approach traffic. Below is a demonstration of what this factor would be for the 2025 build improved scenario, in which your factor should be coded as 0.71: 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈.𝐹𝐹𝐿𝐿𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 (2025 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑏𝑏 𝑈𝑈𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑏𝑏)=𝑇𝑇𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿𝑈𝑈 𝐴𝐴𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖.𝑉𝑉𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈.(𝑁𝑁𝐹𝐹.𝐹𝐹𝑜𝑜 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝐿𝐿 𝑥𝑥 𝐻𝐻𝑈𝑈𝐻𝐻ℎ 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑉𝑉𝐹𝐹𝑈𝑈.)= 3712 𝑥𝑥 (0.7 ∗371)=3712 𝑥𝑥 260 =𝟎𝟎.𝟕𝟕𝟕𝟕 16. Adjust the crosswalk timing at Rt. 11 @ Rest Church Rd should be adjusted slightly. The east- west crossing should have a clearance interval of 30s (106 ft / 3.5 ft/s) and the north-south crossing should have a clearance interval of 29s (101 ft / 3.5 ft/s). The walk times can be reduced to 7s each. On that note, I recommend that you ignore the pedestrian timing in your split programming if it is advantageous and let it bump out of coord when a ped call is received. Pedestrian calls are likely to be quite rare and this change will likely produce a daily operational benefit. 17. For the SB commercial entrance onto Business Blvd and the I-81N off-ramp that both back up with right turns, we recommend allowing 1 vehicle to enter the blocked intersection using the simulation settings. This may more accurately represent driver behavior under such conditions. 18. Additional mitigation needs to be considered for the I-81N off-ramp, as SimTraffic conditions (10 runs) after adjusting the ‘enter blocked intersection’ settings currently show a maximum queue of 1,666 feet. This puts traffic well into the I-81 mainline. 19. The NB left turn lane at Rt. 11 & Rest Church Rd is contributing to much of the delay and improving this movement would free up capacity for EB Rest Church Rd traffic, potentially lessening the I-81N ramp queue. As per our 12/6 meeting, Pennoni will put together a design concept for this improvement for VDOT review. 223 1 Wan Chong From:Ronald A. Mislowsky Sent:Thursday, December 22, 2016 12:22 PM To:Douglas R. Kennedy Cc:Wan Chong Subject:FW: Whitehall Route 11 Improvements Concept Plan Attachments:RT 11 Improvements Exhibit Whitehall 12-13-2016.pdf See comments below Can you review and let me know your thoughts. Sean Obrien is asking when we can get the TIA resubmitted? Ronald A. Mislowsky, PE Associate Vice President, Office Director Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2085 | Mobile: 540-664-2110 www.pennoni.com | RMislowsky@Pennoni.com From: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT) [mailto:Matthew.Smith@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 11:51 AM To: David Frank <DFrank@Pennoni.com>; Ronald A. Mislowsky <RMislowsky@Pennoni.com> Cc: O'Brien, Sean <Sean.OBrien@hillwood.com>; Lineberry, Jeff, PE (VDOT) <Jeff.Lineberry@VDOT.Virginia.gov>; Campbell, Adam (VDOT) <AdamF.Campbell@vdot.virginia.gov>; Rhodes, Timothy (VDOT) <Timothy.Rhodes@vdot.virginia.gov>; Funkhouser, Rhonda (VDOT) <Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov> Subject: RE: Whitehall Route 11 Improvements Concept Plan David & Ron, Please find our preliminary review responses in Red. Item A: The minimum VDOT Standard width for a raised median curb is 4’. We are proposing a raised median curb width of 2’. Eliminate Median as it serves no purpose if existing Claytor property entrance is closed. Item B: South bound right turn lane entering Exxon service station. The VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ turn lane and a 200’ taper. We are proposing a 150’ turn lane and no taper. No issue. It is an existing condition as this is all the turn lane that currently exist. Recommend seeking a shared access for the Exxon with the proposed Mr. Fuel site and eliminate the current Exxon entrance if possible. Item C: North bound left turn lane entering Exxon service station. The VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ turn lane and a 200’ taper. We are proposing a 100’ turn lane and a 100’ taper. No issue, because it appears the TWLTL in advance can be converted to an exclusive left turn lane as needed. Item D: North bound through lane transition. The VDOT minimum standard for transition is 300’. We are proposing a 290’ transition. Plans show 294’ why can’t the additional 6’ of shift be obtained? Item E: North bound Route 11 widening south of intersection. The VDOT standard requires an 8’ shoulder. We are proposing a 4’ shoulder and roadside ditch section. Will require a waiver. Provide more information on existing shoulder widths. We do not foresee as a problem. Item F: We are proposing the relocation of the entranced previously approved for the Claytor property. This relocation increases the north bound right turn lane and the distance of the entrance with the intersection. Make relocated entrance a right in only and shift to the south as far as possible. 224 2 Item G: We are proposing 10’ from the back of curb to the Right-of-Way. We also propose that a minimum strip of 4’ separate the sidewalk and the back of curb. This sidewalk may reside in the Right-of-Way or within an easement outside of the Right-of-Way. This sidewalk is to be installed by others at the time the adjacent property develops. OK Item H: North bound left and right turn lanes south of intersection. The VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ turn lane and a 200’ taper. We are proposing a 150’ turn lanes and a 140’ right turn lane taper and no taper for the left turn lanes. OK as long as TIA shows it works. Item I: North bound through lane north of intersection provides the required 300’ transition. For the north bound right turn lane to retail entrance the VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ taper and a 200’ turn lane. We are proposing a 300’ taper coincidental with the 300’ transition and a 100’ turn lane. Should be ok, TIA needs to validate adequacy Item I: We are proposing an access easement between Claytor and Hillwood to allow inter-parcel access to entrance #1. Yes, We see this a way for traffic to make a left on to Business Blvd. and back to Route 11 & I -81. * Item J: We have modified entrance 1 to allow U-turns. We do not believe that a waiver is required, but we would like VDOT comments on whether this modification would be approved. We will review with roadway plans and AutoTurn analysis provided. Truck U-turns may need to be restricted and signage added to direct trucks to I-81 via Business Blvd. to Route 669, Woodbine Road to Route 11 to Route 669, Rest Church Road *Other items lane widths shown in red on Business Blvd add up to 77’ rather than 76’. Eliminate the median and the site plan entrance would need to become a right in /right out with inter-parcel access to the property to the west. Matthew B. Smith, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer VDOT - Land Development Clarke, Frederick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 Phone # (540) 984-5615 Fax # (540) 984-5607 From: David Frank [mailto:DFrank@Pennoni.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 1:09 PM To: Smith, Matthew, P.E. (VDOT); Lineberry, Jeff, PE (VDOT) Cc: O'Brien, Sean; Ronald A. Mislowsky Subject: Whitehall Route 11 Improvements Concept Plan Good afternoon Matt, I am attaching a concept plan with notations for the proposed Route 11 and Rest Church Road intersection improvements for the Whitehall e-commerce Proposed Fulfillment Center development. The pdf shows the dual left turn lanes and the transitions that we can provide in red, and the summary of the waivers requested and other modifications are detailed in the descriptions below. Item A: The minimum VDOT Standard width for a raised median curb is 4’. We are proposing a raised median curb width of 2’. Item B: South bound right turn lane entering Exxon service station. The VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ turn lane and a 200’ taper. We are proposing a 150’ turn lane and no taper. Item C: North bound left turn lane entering Exxon service station. The VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ turn lane and a 200’ taper. We are proposing a 100’ turn lane and a 100’ taper. Item D: North bound through lane transition. The VDOT minimum standard for transition is 300’. We are proposing a 290’ transition. Item E: North bound Route 11 widening south of intersection. The VDOT standard requires an 8’ shoulder. We are proposing a 4’ shoulder and roadside ditch section. 225 3 Item F: We are proposing the relocation of the entranced previously approved for the Claytor property. This relocation increases the north bound right turn lane and the distance of the entrance with the intersection. Item G: We are proposing 10’ from the back of curb to the Right-of-Way. We also propose that a minimum strip of 4’ separate the sidewalk and the back of curb. This sidewalk may reside in the Right-of-Way or within an easement outside of the Right-of-Way. This sidewalk is to be installed by others at the time the adjacent property develops. Item H: North bound left and right turn lanes south of intersection. The VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ turn lane and a 200’ taper. We are proposing a 150’ turn lanes and a 140’ right turn lane taper and no taper for the left turn lanes. Item I: North bound through lane north of intersection provides the required 300’ transition. For the north bound right turn lane to retail entrance the VDOT minimum standard is a 200’ taper and a 200’ turn lane. We are proposing a 300’ taper coincidental with the 300’ transition and a 100’ turn lane. Item I: We are proposing an access easement between Claytor and Hillwood to allow inter-parcel access to entrance #1. Item J: We have modified entrance 1 to allow U-turns. We do not believe that a waiver is required, but we would like VDOT comments on whether this modification would be approved. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments. David Frank Pennoni 117 East Piccadilly Street | Winchester, VA 22601 Direct: 540-771-2087 www.pennoni.com | DFrank@Pennoni.com PARTNERS FOR WHAT'S POSSIBLE 226 © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 TomTom REST CHU R C H R O A D INTERSTATE 81ZACAHRY ANN LANEWHITEHALL BUSINESS PARK REST C H U R C H R O A D CARROLLTON SUBDIVISION RIDGEWAY ESTATES THIST L E L A N ERUEBUCK ROADQUAIL MEADOWS SUBDIVISION CLEVENGER SUBDIVISION VI R G I N I A S T A T E L I N E W E S T V I R G I N I A S T A T E L I N E W E SNAD83 NAD83PROPERTY ID: 33-A-90, 33-A-89, AND 33-9-1A STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN (GDP) PLAN NUMBER: XXXXX VIRGINIA TECHNOLOGY PARK VICINITY MAP SOURCE - MICROSOFT CORPORATION SCALE 1" = 2000' TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER KITTLESON & ASSOCIATES 11480 COMMERCE PARK DR, SUITE 230 RESTON, VA 20191 CONTACT: ANDREW BUTSICK, P.E. (571) 384-2948 CIVIL ENGINEER BOHLER ENGINEERING 28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE; SUITE 201 WARRENTON, VA 20186 CONTACT: KATHERINE ROBERTS, P.E. (540) 349-4500 SHEET INDEX SHEET TITLE SHEET NUMBER COVER SHEET C-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C-2 GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN C-3 OVERALL ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN C-4 LANDSCAPE BUFFER SECTIONS C-5 AGENT, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE APPROVAL BLOCK LAND USE ATTORNEY WALSH COLUCCI LUBELEY & WALSH PC ONE EAST MARKET STREET, SUITE 300 LEESBURG, VIRGINIA 20176 CONTACT: J. RANDALL MINCHEW (703) 737-3633 APPLICANT EXECUTIVE LAND HOLDINGS IV, LLC 3843 WEST CHESTER PIKE NEWTOWN SQUARE, PA 19073 CONTACT: JOHN KNOTT, III JKNOTT@EQUUSDEVELOPMENT.COM (215) 575-2493 OWNER PARCEL 33-A-89 DTS LC & MINOR, WILLIAM O PO BOX 2368 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 OWNER PARCEL 33-A-90 DTS LC PO BOX 2368 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 1 REVISION 1 - REVISIONS REV DATE COMMENT DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 03/03/2026 1ST COUNTY REVIEW GAP KSR 03/03/2026 DISCLAIMERPROJECT No.: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: DATE: CAD I.D.: PROJECT: FOR H:\2025\VAB250037.00\CAD\DRAWINGS\PLAN SETS\P-CNDS-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-1 COVERGPTHIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. SHEET NUMBER: SHEET TITLE: VAB250037.00 GAP KSR 06/30/2025 P-CNDS-VAB2 GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN EXECUTIVE LAND HOLDINGS IV, LLC 1420 REST CHURCH ROAD CLEAR BROOK, VA 22624 FREDERICK COUNTY, VA 28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201 WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186 Phone:(540) 349-4500 Fax:(540) 349-0321 VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTENAUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES©SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERINGLAND SURVEYINGPROGRAM MANAGEMENTLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURESUSTAINABLE DESIGNPERMITTING SERVICESTRANSPORTATION SERVICESBOHLER Mar 03, 2026Know what's below. Call before you dig. ALWAYS CALL 811 It's fast. It's free. It's the law. KATHERINE ROBERTS Lic. No. 0402060193 03/03/2026 C-1 COVER SHEET OWNER PARCEL 33-9-1A DTS LC PO BOX 2368 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 227 SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSUZACHARY ANN LANEINTERSTATE 81REST CHURCH ROADPIN: 33/ A/ 89/ /DTS LC & MINOR, WILLIAM OPO BOX 2368WINCHESTER, VA 22604LOT SIZE: 106.79 ACRESEXISTING ZONING: RAPROPOSED ZONING: TMPIN: 33/ A/ 90/ /DTS LCPO BOX 2368WINCHESTER, VA 22604LOT SIZE: 112.97 ACRESEXISTING ZONING: RAPROPOSED ZONING: TMPIN: 33/ 9/ 1/ A/DTS LCPO BOX 2368WINCHESTER, VA 22604LOT SIZE: 0.30 ACRESEXISTING ZONING: RAPROPOSED ZONING: TMTHISTLE LANETHISTLE LANER U E B U C K L A N ES18° 44' 13.88"W1031.698S73° 59' 38.25"E824.197 S11° 56' 14.78"W229.930S79° 14' 09.78"E60.000N 2 3 ° 5 1 ' 5 5 . 8 7 "W 1 8 9 3 . 9 3 6S18° 44' 13.88"W882.857S66° 23' 01.89"W1225.230N07° 25' 39 .04 "W2111.000N66° 35' 09.30"E1858.083N 2 3 ° 5 1 ' 5 5 . 8 7 "W 2 2 8 1 . 4 2 9 L=82.734, R=1020.000N79° 57' 32.90"E257.660L =2 2 6 .6 4 9 ,R =6 2 7 .8 2 0 S79° 21' 23.47"E 1600.271 S10° 50' 26.78"W20.645S78° 03' 28.22"E292.750S68° 50' 52.22"E77.670S79° 13' 56.29"E25.000S29° 14' 00.67"E53.159S11° 56' 17.32"W2501.386WESNAD83NAD83123456 7891011121314151617181920212223242527262829C-2EXISTINGCONDITIONSPLAN1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREV DATE COMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORC:\BOHLERCAD_USERDATA\TEMP\ACPUBLISH_18012\P-EXST-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-2 EXSTGP THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-EXST-VAB2GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone: (540) 349-4500Fax: (540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER Mar 03, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026LEGENDREZONING AREA (220.06 ACRES)APPROXIMATE WETLANDS LIMITSADJOINERSHATCH LEGENDEXISTINGFLOODPLAINEXISTINGWETLANDSFEMA APPROXIMATE ZONE A1"=250'025062.5125250APPROXIMATE STREAM CENTERLINEEXISTING CONDITIONS 100-YR FLOODPLAIN228 SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSPILEFPSCALECEM.CEM.CEM.CEM.CEM.FPSSSSSUINTERSTATE 81REST CHURCH ROADTHISTLE LANETHISTLE LANES18° 44' 13.88"W1031.698S73° 59' 38.25"E824.197 S11° 56' 14.78"W229.930S79° 14' 09.78"E60.000N 2 3 ° 5 1 ' 5 5 . 8 7 "W 1 8 9 3 . 9 3 6 R U E B U C K L A N ES18° 44' 13.88"W882.857S66° 23' 01.89"W1225.230N07° 25' 39 .04 "W2111.000N66° 35' 09.30"E1858.083N 2 3 ° 5 1 ' 5 5 . 8 7 "W 2 2 8 1 . 4 2 9 L=82.734, R=1020.000N79° 57' 32.90"E257.660L =2 2 6 .6 4 9 ,R =6 2 7 .8 2 0 S79° 21' 23.47"E 1600.271 S10° 50' 26.78"W20.645S78° 03' 28.22"E292.750S68° 50' 52.22"E77.670S79° 13' 56.29"E25.000S29° 14' 00.67"E53.159S11° 56' 17.32"W2501.386WESNAD83NAD83 FP FPFPFPFPFP F P FPFP F P F P FPFP FPFP FPFP FP FP FP PROP DH-8225,000 SF2 STORIESPROP DH-10225,000 SF2 STORIESSWMAREA75' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 7 5 ' L AND SC A PE BU F F ER 75' LANDSCAPE BUFFERTECHNOLOGY PARK ROADZACHARY ANN LANE75' LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROP DH-1 225,000 SF2 STORIESPROP DH-2 175,000 SF2 STORIESPOTENTIALSUBSTATION AREA± 18 ACRES(900-MW POWER ANTICIPATED)SWMAREAPROP DH-6 225,000 SF2 STORIESPROP DH-4 225,000 SF2 STORIESPROP DH-3 225,000 SF2 STORIESPROP DH-5 225,000 SF2 STORIES200' BUILDING SETBACK 200' BUILDING SETBACK200' BUILDING SETBACK2 0 0 ' BU I LD ING S E TBAC KPROP DH-7250,000 SF2 STORIESPROP DH-9275,000 SF2 STORIESPROP 50' FUTUREROW RESERVATION(ROAD CONSTRUCTEDTO GS-3 STANDARD)PROP 50' FUTUREROW RESERVATION(ROAD CONSTRUCTEDTO GS-3 STANDARD)EMERGENCY EXITONLY WITH GATE ANDDO NOT ENTERSIGNAGEFULL MOVEMENT IN/RIGHT-OUT ONLYPROP ADJACENTPROPERTYACCESSGATEDSECONDARYACCESSEX ADJANCENTPROPERTYACCESS TOREMAINPROP CONNECTIVITY TOPARCEL 33-A-8852.5' RIGHT-OF-WAYRESERVATION FORFUTURE ROADWIDENING50'200'75'75'200'75'25'200'52.5'3 5 ' F R O N T Y A R D S E T B A C K PROPOSED EXTENT OFSHOULDER WIDENINGPER VDOT GS-3STANDARDPRELIMINARY PROPOSEDCONDITIONS 100-YR FLOODPLAINPROP ± 14,000 SFOFFICE / ADMINSPACEPROP MONUMENT SIGN31.9'VAR. WIDTHLANDSCAPEBUFFER35' FRONT YARD SETBACKVAR. WIDTH RIGHT-OF-WAYRESERVATION FORFUTURE ROAD WIDENINGSWMAREAPROP±5,000 SFOFFICE / ADMINSPACEPROP SECUREENTRANCE WITHGUARDHOUSEPROP SECUREENTRANCE WITHGUARDHOUSEPROP GATEDACCESS(END OF STATEMAINTENANCE)C-3GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLAN1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREV DATE COMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORH:\2025\VAB250037.00\CAD\DRAWINGS\PLAN SETS\P-GDP-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-3 GDPGP THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-GDP-VAB25GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone: (540) 349-4500Fax: (540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER Mar 03, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026LEGENDPROPOSED ROW RESERVATION(TECHNOLOGY PARK ROAD)APPROXIMATE FLOODPLAIN LIMITSAPPROXIMATE WETLANDS LIMITSGENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOTES1. THE GENERALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROPOSES TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 220.06 ACRES TO THE TMZONING DISTRICT.2. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WILL BE PROVIDED PER APPLICABLE STATE AND LOCAL STANDARDS AT TIME OFSITE PLAN.3. THE PROPERTY DOES NOT CONTAIN GRAVES, OBJECTS OR STRUCTURES MARKING BURIAL PLACES ASDETERMINED BY VISUAL SURVEY.4. THE PROPERTY CONTAINS NO KNOWN HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC SUBSTANCES AS SET FORTH IN TITLE 40, CODEOF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PARTS 16.4, 302.4, AND 355 OR IN VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENTREGULATIONS.5. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA ZONE A (WITHOUT BFE ORDEPTH) PER MAP ENTITLED “NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP,FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA ALL JURISDICTIONS, MAP NUMBER 51069C0150E, WITH A MAP REVISED DATE OFJANUARY 29, 2021.6. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY MAY BE PHASED THROUGH MULTIPLE SITE PLANS.7. BUILDING SETBACKS MAY INCLUDE FEATURES SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO PARKING, FENCE, ACCESSORYSTRUCTURES, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES, AND OTHER SIMILAR FEATURES.8. ENTRANCE LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND TO BE DETERMINED AT TIME OF FINAL SITE PLANDESIGN. LOCATIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH VDOT SPACING REQUIREMENTS. ACCESS POINTS MAY BEADDED OR ELIMINATED SUBJECT TO VDOT APPROVAL AT TIME OF SITE PLAN.9. LANDSCAPE BUFFERS WILL BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF SITE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF FREDERICK COUNTY. THEIR LOCATIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED AT TIME OF SITE PLAN.10. LANDSCAPING WILL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT FREDERICK COUNTY DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS IN PLACE AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN SUBMISSION.11. THIS GDP HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED FOR FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE FREDERICK COUNTY ORDINANCE ATTHIS TIME. ALL PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MAY BE AMENDED BY THE OWNERS TOFULFILL REQUIREMENTS OF FINAL ENGINEERING, OR COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT STATE AGENCYREGULATIONS AND/OR COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS/STANDARDS IN PLACE AT THE TIME OF SITEPLAN SUBMISSION.12. UNLESS A GREATER BUILDING SETBACK IS SHOWN ON THE GDP, THE BUILDING SETBACKS AT TIME OF SITEPLAN ARE PER THE MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACKS ESTABLISHED BY THE TM DISTRICT WITHIN THE ZONINGORDINANCE.13. OUTDOOR TRASH RECEPTACLES WILL BE SCREENED FROM ALL PUBLIC STREETS AND ADJACENT PROPERTY,UNLESS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY CONTAINS THE SAME USE, BY MEANS ESTABLISHED IN THE COUNTY'SDESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL.14. LIGHTING FACILITIES WILL BE PROVIDED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE.15. ALL SIGNAGE ON THE PROPERTY WILL CONFORM WITH FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE.16. PROPOSED PARKING AND LOADING AREAS WILL COMPLY WITH FREDERICK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE.LIMITS OF EXISTING ZACHARY ANN LANE ROW(TO BE REPAVED & INCORPORATED INTOTECHNOLOGY PARK ROAD ROW)75' LANDSCAPE BUFFER200' BUILDING SETBACKAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PARCEL ACCESS /PRIVATE COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE1"=250'025062.5125250REZONING AREA (220.06 ACRES)HATCH LEGENDEXISTING FLOODPLAINEXISTING WETLANDSLIMITS OF EXISTINGZACHARY ANN LANEROW(TO BE RELOCATED)LIMITS OF EXISTINGZACHARY ANN LANE ROW(TO BE REPAVED &INCORPORATED INTOTECHNOLOGY PARK ROADROW)APPROXIMATE STREAM CENTERLINEPROPOSED ROW RESERVATION FOR FUTUREROAD WIDENING (REST CHURCH ROAD)35' FRONT YARD SETBACKPRELIMINARY PROPOSED CONDITIONS 100-YR FLOODPLAINFPEXISTING CONDITIONS 100-YR FLOODPLAINANTICIPATED ROUTING PATH FORTRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTUREPRIVATE ROAD BUILT TOVDOT GS-3 STANDARDWITH ROW TO BEDEDICATED UPONREQUEST OF COUNTYWHEN NEEDED FORPUBLIC THROUGH ROADAPPLICANT:EXECUTIVE LAND HOLDINGS IV, LLCOWNERS:PIN: 33/A/90DTC LCPIN: 33/A/89DTC LCPIN: 33/9/1ADTC LCCURRENT ZONING: RA (RURAL AREAS DISTRICT)REZONING AREA: 220.06 ACRESPROPOSED ZONING: TM (TECHNOLOGY MANUFACTURING PARK DISTRICT) 229 K:\Brittany Riddick\PE Seals & Signatures\Signature - Roberts.jpg1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREVDATECOMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORC:\BOHLERCAD_USERDATA\TEMP\ACPUBLISH_18216\P-REND-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-4 RENDMW THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-REND-VAB2GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone:(540) 349-4500Fax:(540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER May 19, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026C-4OVERALLILLUSTRATIVEPLANINTERSTATE 81SWMAREATECHNOLOGY PARK ROADZACHARY ANN LANEREST CHURCH ROADSWMAREASUBSTATIONPAD AREAPROP 50' FUTUREROWRESERVATIONPROP ± 14,000 SFOFFICE / ADMIN SPACEEMERGENCY EXIT ONLYWITH GATE ANDDO NOT ENTER SIGNAGEPROP VAR.WIDTH FUTUREROWRESERVATIONGATED SECONDARY ACCESSILLUSTRATIVE LEGEND:PROPOSED BUILDINGSWM AREAEQUIPMENT AND SERVICE AREASUBSTATION AREATRAVEL WAY200' BUILDING SETBACK75' ACTIVE LANDSCAPE SETBACKPLAN IS ILLUSTRATIVEAND SUBJECT TOCHANGE AT TIME OFSITE PLANFLOODPLAIN AREAPROP ±5,000SFOFFICE/ADMIN SPACEPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING175,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING250,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING275,000 SF2 STORIES1"=250'025062.5125250FULL MOVEMENT IN /RIGHT TURN OUT ONLYLANDSCAPE BUFFER PLANTINGS(MAY CONSIST OF TREE SAVE ORPROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL, TO BEDETERMINED AT TIME OF SITE PLAN)R U E B U C K L A N EPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESPROPOSEDBUILDING225,000 SF2 STORIESSWMAREASUBSTATIONPAD AREASUBSTATIONPAD AREA230 K:\Brittany Riddick\PE Seals & Signatures\Signature - Roberts.jpg1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREVDATECOMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORC:\BOHLERCAD_USERDATA\TEMP\ACPUBLISH_18216\P-REND-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-5 SECTIONS 1-3MW THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-REND-VAB2GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone:(540) 349-4500Fax:(540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER May 19, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026C-5LANDSCAPEBUFFERSECTIONS231 C-6LANDSCAPEBUFFERSECTIONSK:\Brittany Riddick\PE Seals & Signatures\Signature - Roberts.jpg1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREVDATECOMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORC:\BOHLERCAD_USERDATA\TEMP\ACPUBLISH_18216\P-REND-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-6 SECTIONS 4MW THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-REND-VAB2GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone:(540) 349-4500Fax:(540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER May 19, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026232 C-7LANDSCAPEBUFFERSECTIONSK:\Brittany Riddick\PE Seals & Signatures\Signature - Roberts.jpg1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREVDATECOMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORC:\BOHLERCAD_USERDATA\TEMP\ACPUBLISH_18216\P-REND-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-7 SECTIONS 5-7MW THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-REND-VAB2GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone:(540) 349-4500Fax:(540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER May 19, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026233 C-8LANDSCAPEBUFFERSECTIONSK:\Brittany Riddick\PE Seals & Signatures\Signature - Roberts.jpg1REVISION 1 -REVISIONSREVDATECOMMENTDRAWN BYCHECKED BY03/03/20261ST COUNTY REVIEWGAPKSR03/03/2026DISCLAIMER This drawing and/or file has been prepared by Bohler at the request of the Project Owner or his Representative and is being provided solely as a convenience to the recipient. Bohler makes no representation regarding the suitability for the intended use by the recipient. Further, Bohler makes noPROJECT No.:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:CAD I.D.:PROJECT:FORC:\BOHLERCAD_USERDATA\TEMP\ACPUBLISH_18216\P-REND-VAB250037.00-0A----->LAYOUT: C-8 SECTIONS 8-10MW THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR MUNICIPAL AND/OR AGENCYREVIEW AND APPROVAL. IT IS NOT INTENDED AS A CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENT UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.SHEET NUMBER:SHEET TITLE:VAB250037.00GAPKSR06/30/2025P-REND-VAB2GENERALIZEDDEVELOPMENTPLANEXECUTIVE LANDHOLDINGS IV, LLC1420 REST CHURCH ROADCLEAR BROOK, VA 22624FREDERICK COUNTY, VA28 BLACKWELL PARK LANE, SUITE 201WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 20186Phone:(540) 349-4500Fax:(540) 349-0321VA@BohlerEng.comTM THE INFORMATION, DESIGN AND CONTENT OF THIS PLAN ARE PROPRIETARY AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BOHLER. ONLY APPROVED, SIGNED AND SEALED PLANS SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES © SITE CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PERMITTING SERVICES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES BOHLER May 19, 2026 Know what's below.Call before you dig.ALWAYS CALL 811It's fast. It's free. It's the law.KATHERINE ROBERTSLic. No. 040206019303/03/2026234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 Real Estate Taxes Paid for Tax Year 2025 Map Number: 33 9 1A Account#: 8038427 Dept#Ticket#Seq#Owner Name Bill Date Description Tax Paid RE2025 11575 1 DTS LC 4/15/2025 .30 $6.48 RE2025 11575 2 DTS LC 4/15/2025 .30 $6.48 Total Paid: $12.96 This amount represents payments applied during calendar year 2025 and does not include Penalty, Interest or Credit Card Fees. Close this Window Print This Page COUNTY OF FREDERICK P.O. BOX 225 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-0225 C. WILLIAM ORNDOFF, JR 4/6/26, 10:23 AM Frederick County Taxes Paid https://fctaxes.co.frederick.va.us/Applications/TR_PayTaxes/PrintYearlyTaxes.aspx 1/1283 Real Estate Taxes Paid for Tax Year 2025 Map Number: 33 A 89 Account#: 8006465 Dept#Ticket#Seq#Owner Name Bill Date Description Tax Paid RE2025 11573 1 DTS LC 4/15/2025 106.79 ACRES $659.52 RE2025 11573 2 DTS LC 4/15/2025 106.79 ACRES $659.52 Total Paid: $1,319.04 This amount represents payments applied during calendar year 2025 and does not include Penalty, Interest or Credit Card Fees. Close this Window Print This Page COUNTY OF FREDERICK P.O. BOX 225 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-0225 C. WILLIAM ORNDOFF, JR 4/6/26, 10:25 AM Frederick County Taxes Paid https://fctaxes.co.frederick.va.us/Applications/TR_PayTaxes/PrintYearlyTaxes.aspx 1/1284 Real Estate Taxes Paid for Tax Year 2025 Map Number: 33 A 90 Account#: 8006466 Dept#Ticket#Seq#Owner Name Bill Date Description Tax Paid RE2025 11574 1 DTS LC 4/15/2025 112.97 ACRES $966.24 RE2025 11574 2 DTS LC 4/15/2025 112.97 ACRES $966.24 Total Paid: $1,932.48 This amount represents payments applied during calendar year 2025 and does not include Penalty, Interest or Credit Card Fees. Close this Window Print This Page COUNTY OF FREDERICK P.O. BOX 225 WINCHESTER, VA 22604-0225 C. WILLIAM ORNDOFF, JR 4/6/26, 10:25 AM Frederick County Taxes Paid https://fctaxes.co.frederick.va.us/Applications/TR_PayTaxes/PrintYearlyTaxes.aspx 1/1285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION EXCEPTION The Applicant respectfully requests a waiver of, or exception from, the provisions of Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance Section 144-25, which requires all utilities to be installed underground in new industrial parks, office parks, and shopping centers, unless waived by the Board of Supervisors. Section 144-25 of the Frederick County Subdivision Ordinance provides that exceptions to the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance may be granted in unusual situations, or when strict adherence to the general regulations would result in substantial injustice or hardship. The Applicant posits that both are true in the instant case. The Properties (as defined in the attached application document) are zoned to the RA zoning district, and are the subject of a pending application to rezone them to the TM zoning district. The Frederick County Northeast Land Use Plan contemplates the Properties for Mixed Use Industrial/Office. The Property’s location would allow Shenandoah Valley Electric Cooperative (SVEC) to supply electricity to the Property. At the time of this application, the properties to the south, parcels 33-A-88 and 33-12-24, are planned to be developed into a NextEra substation. The adjacent substation would be able to route electrical power directly to substations on the Properties, which are proposed as part of the rezoning application, and which would distribute that power to the individual structures on the Properties. However, the Applicant has operational, environmental, and logistical concerns regarding underground installation of the electrical lines to serve the Property. As depicted on the GDP for the rezoning, the proposed utility lines traverse a significant floodplain area on the Property, making undergrounding the utility lines untenable without inflicting significant environmental disturbance to a sensitive area. Further, the anticipated routing path for transmission infrastructure between the substations and the proposed structures internal to the Property would run along many of the planned streets, meaning that installation, maintenance, and repair of distribution lines would result in those streets being destroyed and reconstructed. In consideration of the above, the Applicant requests that the requirements of Section 144- 25 be waived or exempted, and that overhead utility lines be permitted on the Property. 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 June 2025 VIRGINIA TECHNOLOGY PARK Frederick County, VA 313 Virginia Technology Park Frederick County, VA Prepared for: Equus Capital Partners, Ltd. 3843 West Chester Pike Newtown Square, PA 19073 Prepared by: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 11480 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 230 Reston, VA 20191 703.885.8970 Project Manager: Andrew Butsick, PE, RSP1 Senior Engineer Project Principal: Chris Tiesler, PE, PTOE Senior Principal Engineer Project Number 31757 June 2025 Andrew Butsick No. 0402058797 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Traffic Engineer 314 CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 1 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 11 Transportation Impact Analysis ........................................................................................................ 22 Year 2031 Background Traffic Conditions ................................................................................ 22 Year 2031 Total Traffic Conditions .............................................................................................. 29 Turn Lane Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 40 Access Management Evaluation ................................................................................................... 42 Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................................. 45 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................. 47 References ................................................................................................................................................. 48 315 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park List of Figures Kittelson & Associates, Inc. ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 2. Conceptual Site Plan ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 Figure 3. Zoning Map ......................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4. Existing Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices .............................................................................. 12 Figure 5. Existing Traffic Conditions – Weekday AM and Weekday PM Peak Hours ............................................. 14 Figure 6. Existing Lane Group Levels of Service – Weekday AM and Weekday PM Peak Hours ....................... 15 Figure 7. Proposed Lane Configuration – US 11/Rest Church Road – Existing Conditions Mitigation ........... 18 Figure 8. Converting Eastbound Through Lane to Shared Left-Through – US 11/Rest Church Road ............. 20 Figure 9. Year 2031 Background Traffic Conditions – Weekday AM and Weekday PM Peak Hours ............... 24 Figure 10. Year 2031 Background Lane Group Levels of Service – Weekday AM and Weekday PM Peak Hours ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 11. Year 2031 Total Traffic Assumed Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices ......................... 31 Figure 12. Estimated Trip Distribution Pattern ...................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 13. Site-Generated Trips ................................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 14. Reassignment of Existing Trips on Southern Portion of Zachary Ann Lane to Technology Park Road. ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 15. Year 2031 Total Traffic Conditions – Weekday AM and Weekday PM Peak Hours ........................... 35 Figure 16. Year 2031 Total Traffic Lane Group Levels of Service – Weekday AM and Weekday PM Peak Hours ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 17. Right-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) ....................... 40 Figure 18. Left-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) .......................... 41 Figure 19. Access Management Evaluation............................................................................................................................. 43 316 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park List of Tables Kittelson & Associates, Inc. iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Existing Transportation Facilities and Roadway Designations ....................................................................... 11 Table 2. Existing Conditions – Summary of Peak Hour Levels of Service, Maximum Back of Queue, and Delay for Each Lane Group by Intersection ............................................................................................................................. 16 Table 3. Existing Conditions – Mitigation Strategy – Eastbound Shared Left-Through Lane at US 11/Rest Church Road ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Table 4. Year 2031 Background Traffic Conditions – Summary of Peak Hour Levels of Service, Maximum Back of Queue, and Delay for Each Lane Group by Intersection .................................................................................... 26 Table 5. Year 2031 Background Traffic Conditions – Mitigation Strategy – Eastbound Shared Left-Through Lane at US 11/Rest Church Road ................................................................................................................................................ 28 Table 6. Estimated Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................................ 29 Table 7. 2031 Total Traffic Conditions – Summary of Peak Hour Levels of Service, Maximum Back of Queue, and Delay for Each Lane Group by Intersection .................................................................................................... 37 Table 8. Year 2031 Total Traffic Conditions – Mitigation Strategy – Eastbound Shared Left-Through Lane at US 11/Rest Church Road ................................................................................................................................................................ 39 Table 9. Eastbound Volumes – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) – Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40 Table 10. Westbound Volumes – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) – Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 41 APPENDICES Appendix A Scoping Letter Appendix B May 2025 Turning Movement Counts Appendix C Level of Service Description Appendix D Existing Traffic Conditions Worksheets Appendix E Existing Traffic Conditions Worksheets - Mitigation Appendix F In-Process Development Trips Appendix G 2031 Background Traffic Conditions Worksheets Appendix H 2031 Background Traffic Conditions Worksheets - Mitigation Appendix I 2031 Total Traffic Conditions Worksheets Appendix J 2031 Total Traffic Conditions Worksheets: Mitigation 317 Executive Summary 318 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 1 Executive Summary A traffic operations analysis has been conducted to confirm that the transportation system can adequately support the proposed Virginia Technology Park, in fulfillment of Frederick County’s and Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT) requirements for traffic impact studies. The scope of the project analysis was developed in collaboration with County and VDOT staff. Specifically, this analysis includes: ◼ Year 2025 existing land use and transportation system conditions within the site vicinity; ◼ Forecast year 2031 background traffic conditions (without site development) during the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak periods including in-process/approved developments and regional growth; ◼ Trip generation and distribution estimates for the proposed development; ◼ Forecast year 2031 total traffic conditions based on build out of the development including queuing and turn lane analyses; ◼ Turn lane evaluations at site entrance to Rest Church Road; ◼ Access management evaluation; and, ◼ Conclusions and recommendations. Based on the results of the transportation impact analysis, the transportation system can accommodate full build-out of the proposed development with the noted recommendations. The findings of this analysis and our recommendations are discussed below. Existing Conditions ◼ All intersections currently operate at LOS D or better with queues stored within existing lanes with the following exception: o US 11/Rest Church Road (Study Intersection #4): The eastbound left-turn queues spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The queues block the upstream end of the lane approximately 11 percent of the time during the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ Signal re-timing alone (i.e., no physical changes to the travelled way) is not anticipated to fully prevent the spill back of eastbound left-turn movements at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. ▪ Queue spillbacks can be mitigated by adding capacity to the eastbound left-turn movement through conversion of the existing eastbound through lane to a shared left/through lane. This would also require: • Restriping of the eastbound approach lanes • Conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to operate under “split” signal phasing 319 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 2 • Replacing the existing three-section signal head for the eastbound through lane with a four-section head (three ball indicators and one green left-turn arrow indicator) • Potential widening of US 11 to the north of Rest Church Road to add a second northbound lane that ends/merges a minimum of 495 feet north of the existing commercial driveway on the east side of US 11. • Adjustments to coordination with the adjacent signalized intersections at the I-81 interchange. ▪ If implemented, the eastbound queues would be anticipated to be contained within the existing lane storage. Minimal impacts are anticipated at adjacent intersections due to the conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to split- phased at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. 2031 Background (Pre-Build-Out) Traffic Conditions ◼ A 1.0 percent annual growth rate was applied to traffic volumes on public roadways account for near-term regional traffic growth. ◼ Four in-process developments were identified at the time of scoping for build -out by 2031: o Arogas Parcel – 22,570 square feet of shopping center in the northeast quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection o Parcel 33-A-12 – 150,000 square feet of industrial development in the southwest quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection o Parcel 33-9-4 – 8,810 square feet of warehousing development to the south of the site along the existing Zachary Ann Lane. This parcel would access Rest Church Road via Techology Center Road after build-out of the proposed Virginia Techology Park development. o Whitehall Commerce Center – Undeveloped portions of the larger site located west of US 11 along Rest Church Road include 162,000 square feet of industrial development. ◼ No new transportation improvements were identified to be completed by the build -out year of 2031 within the study area. ◼ Under year 2031 background traffic conditions (pre-build-out), study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at LOS D or better with queues contained within the existing storage with the following exception: o US 11/Rest Church Road (Study Intersection #4): Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound left-turn queues are projected to spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection for approximately 25 percent of the weekday p.m. peak hour. 320 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 3 ▪ Converting the eastbound through lane to a shared left/through lane and making the associated signal improvements is anticipated to reduce queuing on the eastbound approach to within the existing lane storage. 2031 Total (Post-Build-Out)Traffic Conditions ◼ The proposed Virginia Technology Park development consists of eleven data center buildings totaling to 2,350,000 square feet across two campuses. The development also includes three substations and 24,000 square feet of office/administration buildings that directly support the data center operations (i.e., the same end user). ◼ Access to the site is proposed via a new roadway (Technology Park Road), which would connect to the southern portion of the existing Zachary Ann Lane. Technology Park Road would serve all trips to the proposed site and parcels south of the site on Zachary Ann Lane. ◼ All access to the Pilot/Flying J Travel Center would remain in their current locations with egress from the current alignment of Zachary Ann Lane being restricted to right-out only through the addition of a channelizing island to reinforce the truck restri ctions to the west on Rest Church Road. ◼ The development is estimated to generate approximately 1,763 weekday daily trips, 212 weekday a.m. (117 in, 95 out), and 71 weekday p.m. (21 in, 50 out) peak hour trips when built out in year 2031. ◼ Under year 2031 total traffic conditions (post-build-out), critical movements at study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at LOS D or better with queues contained within the existing/proposed storage with the following exception: o US 11/Rest Church Road (Study Intersection #4): Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound left-turn queues are projected to spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection for a portion of the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ The site is not anticipated to add any trips to this movement during the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ Similar to existing and year 2031 background traffic conditions, converting the eastbound through lane to a shared left/through lane and making the associated signal improvements is anticipated to reduce queuing on the eastbound approach to within the existing lane storage. Turn Lane Warrant Evaluation ◼ An evaluation of VDOT left- and right-turn lane warrants for two-lane roadways illustrated turn lanes are not forecast to be warranted on Rest Church Road at the proposed Technology Park Road under year 2031 total traffic conditions. 321 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Executive Summary Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 4 Access Management Evaluation ◼ An evaluation of the proposed location of Technology Park Road was performed with respect to VDOT’s Access Management policies. Based on the minimum spacing standards in Appendix F of VDOT’s Road Design Manual (RDM), the proposed location of Technology Park Road exceeds spacing requirements from adjacent intersections, commercial entrances, and interchanges. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the projected traffic operations within the study area, the following improvements are recommended for future consideration by VDOT and Frederick County: ◼ Convert the eastbound through lane at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection to a shared left/through lane. Appropriate adjustments to signal timing/coordination on Rest Church Road and roadway improvements to US 11 will be required, including converting the Rest Church Road approaches at US 11 to split phasing. o The need for this mitigation strategy is shown to be warranted under existing conditions. The site-related trips added to the network at this intersection represent less than 0.7 percent of the total entering vehicles upon build-out in year 2031. 322 Introduction 323 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Introduction Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 6 Introduction Kittelson and Associates, Inc. (Kittelson) prepared this report to document analysis methodologies and assumptions with regard to the proposed Virginia Technology Park located in the southwest quadrant of the Route 669 (Rest Church Road)/Zachary Ann Lane intersection in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed site, shown in Figure 1, consists of 2,350,000 square feet of data center buildings across two campuses, three power substations, and 24,000 square feet of office and administration buildings associated with the data center buildings. The office and administration buildings directly serve the data center buildings and have the same end user. The Applicant is proposing construct the new major collector road identified in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan (Reference 1) through the site, ultimately connecting to the existing portion of Zachary Ann Lane to the south of the site. This new major collector (hereby referred to as Technology Park Road) would provide access to Rest Church Road for all site access point and for all parcels to the south of the site along the existing Zachary Ann Lane. The existing portion of Zachary Ann Lane on the north end of the site will be terminated in a cul-de-sac and will continue to provide access to the Pilot/Flying-J Travel Center via the Rest Church Road/Zachary Ann Lane intersection. A channelizing island is proposed on the northbound approach to the Rest Church Road/Zachary Ann Lane intersection to reinforce the truck restrictions to the west on Rest Church Road. As such, a ccess to the Pilot/Flying-J Travel Center will remain unchanged under the proposed configuration. Figure 2 shows a preliminary conceptual site plan. The development is proposed to be built out by Year 2031. The general topography for the study site can best be described as level to rolling -hill type terrain. Figure 3 illustrates the current zoning map for Frederick County (Reference 2). The parcel on which the proposed Virginia Technology Park development is located is currently zoned as Rural Area (RA). This analysis determines the transportation related impacts associated with the proposed development and was prepared in accordance with Frederick County and Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requirements for traffic impact studies. The study intersections, time periods for analysis, and scope of this project were selected after County and VDOT staff were consulted. A scoping letter provided for this project is provided in Appendix A. A traffic operations analysis has been conducted to confirm that the transportation system can adequately support the proposed development. Specifically, this analysis includes: ◼ Year 2025 existing land use and transportation system conditions within the site vicinity; ◼ Forecast year 2031 background traffic conditions (without site development) during the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak periods including in-process/approved developments and regional growth; ◼ Trip generation and distribution estimates for the proposed development; ◼ Forecast year 2031 total traffic conditions based on build out of the development including queuing and turn lane analyses; ◼ Turn lane evaluations at site entrance to Rest Church Road; ◼ Access management evaluation; and, ◼ Conclusions and recommendations. 324 SITE 50 522 50 11 81 81 11 37 522 259 7 - Study Intersections## N C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 3:59pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 01Site Vicnity Map Frederick County, VA 1 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure FREDERICK COUNTY, VA SITE - Future Study Intersections 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R DZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD V I R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A 325 H:\31\31757 - Fruit Hill Development\design\_Models\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 19, 2025 - 8:29am - abutsick Layout Tab: 02 2FIGUREVirginia Technology ParkJune 2025Conceptual Site PlanProvided by Bohler Engineering (June 2025)Frederick County, VA326 NC:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:00pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 03 Zoning MapObtained from Frederick County, VAFrederick County, VA3Virginia Technology ParkJune 2025FigureSITE327 Existing Conditions 328 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 11 Existing Conditions The existing conditions analysis identifies the site conditions and current operational and geometric characteristics of the roadways within the study area. These conditions will be compared with future conditions later in this report. Kittelson staff visited and inventoried the proposed Virginia Technology Park development site and surrounding study area in May 2025. At that time, Kittelson collected information regarding site conditions, adjacent land uses, existing traffic operations, and transportation facilities in the study area. Transportation Facilities Table 1 summarizes the primary transportation facilities in the site vicinity. Figure 4 shows the existing lane configurations and traffic control devices at the study intersections. Table 1. Existing Transportation Facilities and Roadway Designations Roadway Classification1 Number of Lanes Speed Limit (mph) Median Side- walks Bicycle Lanes On- Street Parking Surface US 11 (Martinsburg Pike) Major Collector 4 lanes 45 No Partial2 No No Paved I-81 SB Ramps (Exit 323) Interstate Ramp 1 lane 353 No No No No Paved I-81 NB Ramps (Exit 323) Interstate Ramp 1 lane 353 No No No No Paved Route 669 (Rest Church Road) Local 2 lanes 35/454 No No No No Paved Zachary Ann Lane Local 2 lanes Not posted No No No No Paved 1Classifications based on VDOT’s Pathways for Planning Portal (Reference 3). 2Sidewalk on east side of US 11 north of Rest Church Road only. 3Advisory speed. 445 miles-per-hour west of proposed Technology Park Road. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Field observations taken in the site vicinity revealed low levels of pedestrian and bicycle activity along the study area roadways during most hours of the day. No sidewalks were present within the site vicinity except for a short segment of sidewalk along the commercial property on US 11 north of Rest Church Road. The only signalized pedestrian crossing within the study area is the across the east leg at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. TRANSIT FACILITIES No fixed route transit service is provided in the vicinity of the site. 329 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:00pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 04Existing Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices Frederick County, VA 4 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 V I R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A - STOP SIGN - TRAFFIC SIGNAL 1 2 3 4 330 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 13 Existing Traffic Volumes and Peak Hour Operations Turning movement counts were obtained at the study intersections in May 2025. The counts were conducted during typical weekday morning (6:00 to 9:00 AM) and weekday evening (4:00 to 7:00 PM) time periods when school was in session and no extreme weather occurred. Appendix B contains the turning movement counts collected. Consistent with scoping requirements, operational analyses were performed at the following intersections: 1. Rest Church Road/Zachary Ann Lane 2. Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps 3. Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps 4. US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road The most recent signal timing data for the Rest Church Road corridor was obtained from VDOT at the time the turning-movement counts were collected. Current Levels of Service and Volume-to-Capacity Ratios All level of service (LOS) analyses described in this report were performed in accordance with the procedures stated in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (HCM6 - Reference 4)1. A description of level of service and the criteria by which they are determined is presented in Appendix C. This analysis is based on the system hourly peak during each of the study periods to evaluate intersection levels-of-service. The weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours were found to occur from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., respectively. Traffic operations were evaluated using Synchro 11 and SimTraffic in accordance with VDOT’s Traffic Operations and Safety Analysis Manual v2.0 (TOSAM – Reference 5). At several signalized study intersections, the deterministic Synchro model was unable to accurately estimate the 95th percentile queue lengths (i.e., where 95th percentile volumes exceed capacity). As such, SimTraffic software was used to derive the maximum queues. All parameters of the SimTraffic queueing analysis were evaluated in accordance with Section 7.6 of VDOT’s TOSAM. Using VDOT’s Sample Size Determination Tool 2.0, it was determined four (4) microsimulation runs were needed in the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak periods. To ensure accuracy and confidence in the results, fifteen (15) microsimulation runs were performed for each scenario. Figure 5 shows the overall intersection operational results of the existing traffic operations analysis for the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours. Figure 6 shows the lane group LOS. Table 2 summarizes the Synchro 11 peak hour levels of service, SimTraffic maximum back of queue, and delay for each lane group by intersection. Appendix D contains the existing conditions level of service worksheets. 1The current lane configuration on the northbound approach of the Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection does not comply with the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) phasing. As such, HCM 2000 outputs are reported for signalized intersections. 331 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:00pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 05Existing Traffic Operations Weekday AM & PM Peak Hours Frederick County, VA 5 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM CM = INTERSECTION MOVEMENT (UNSIGNALIZED) LOS = INTERSECTION MOVEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (SIGNALIZED)/INTERSECTION MOVEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (UNSIGNALIZED) Del = INTERSECTION AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY (SIGNALIZED)/INTERSECTION MOVEMENT CONTROL DELAY (UNSIGNALIZED) V/C = INTERSECTION VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO 1 2 3 4 576838020937575 75 66 13 88 39 LOS=C Del=26.5 V/C=0.35 5610669110 419 101 LOS=B Del=15.6 V/C=0.2868187111 140 357 118 LOS=C Del=30.6 V/C=0.42 09596 2 21 53 CM=NB LOS=B Del=10.5 V/C=0.13 823131045166189318 125 58 14 82 88 LOS=D Del=38.8 V/C=0.66 8833797164 253 100 LOS=B Del=16.8 V/C=0.31107177154 83 177 164 LOS=C Del=20.6 V/C=0.30 18891 1 3 90 CM=NB LOS=B Del=10.4 V/C=0.13 332 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:00pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 06Existing Lane Group Levels of Service Weekday AM & PM Peak Hours Frederick County, VA 6 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMX - LANE GROUP LEVEL OF SERVICE DDC C CA ACB A BA CC A CA D CCD CDCCCB C CA BCB A BA DC A CB C CDE CDC 333 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 16 Table 2. Existing Conditions – Summary of Peak Hour Levels of Service, Maximum Back of Queue, and Delay for Each Lane Group by Intersection Intersection Information AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Existing turn-lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Route 669 (Rest Church Road)/ Zachary Ann Lane (#1) Two-way Stop-Controlled EB EBT - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 EBR - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 EB Approach - - 0.0 - - 0.0 WB WBL - A 52 7.9 A 8 7.4 WBT - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 WB Approach - - 2.2 - - 0.2 NB NBLR - B 130 10.5 B 116 10.4 NB Approach B - 10.5 B - 10.4 Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps (#2) Signalized EB EBTR - B 133 19.3 B 131 13.8 EB Approach B - 19.3 B - 13.8 WB WBL - D 309 46.9 C 201 29.6 WBT - A 97 3.2 A 142 6.8 WB Approach C - 36.1 B - 18.6 SB SBLT - C 112 33.5 C 145 34.5 SBR 640’ C 96 31.6 C 90 30.7 SB Approach C - 32.4 C - 33.0 Overall C - 30.6 C - 20.6 Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps (#3) Signalized EB EBL - A 143 8.3 A 136 10.0 EBT - A 71 6.9 A 96 8.7 EB Approach A - 7.4 A - 9.2 WB WBT - B 179 12.2 A 123 9.7 WBR - B 70 19.4 A 86 4.2 WB Approach B - 13.6 A - 8.1 NB NBLTR - C 199 32.8 C 334 31.2 NBR 480’ C 129 29.2 C 288 27.8 NB Approach C - 30.8 C - 28.8 Overall B - 15.6 B - 16.8 US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road (#4) Signalized EB EBL - C 124 32.0 D 225 52.4 EBTR - B 102 15.2 B 198 12.7 EB Approach C - 21.0 D - 37.9 WB WBL 250’ E 42 56.9 D 49 54.3 WBT - C 91 278.9 C 103 27.4 WBR - C 49 27.1 C 84 26.9 WB Approach C - 30.3 C - 29.2 NB NBL 150’ D 112 35.5 C 149 34.0 NBT - C 94 22.3 D 270 51.0 NBR 280’ C 14 20.8 C 21 25.4 NB Approach C - 28.1 D - 46.9 SB SBL 240’ D 112 39.3 D 84 38.7 SBT - C 162 27.1 D 158 42.2 SBR 290’ C 144 24.5 C 74 30.6 SB Approach C - 27.1 D - 36.3 Overall C - 26.5 D - 38.8 1 Maximum queues reported from SimTraffic due to 95th percentile queues from Synchro exceeding capacity at one or more signalized intersections. 334 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 17 The existing maximum queues on the northbound approach of the Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection (Study Intersection #3) reported from SimTraffic are notably longer than observed in the field. A review of the SimTraffic model illustrated a majority of the northbound right -turning traffic from the off-ramp ultimately destined for US 11 northbound stacked in the shared left-through-right lane on the off-ramp. However, field observations showed a majority of the northbound right-turns from the off-ramp used the exclusive right-turn lane (often immediately cutting across three lanes to reach the left- turn lane onto US 11 northbound from Rest Church Road). To help “encourage” more vehicles turning left onto US 11 to utilize the exclusive right-turn lane on the off-ramp, the default “Mandatory Distance” and “Positioning Distance” parameters were reduced in the Simulation Settings. By lowering this value to less than the link length between I-81 and US 11, vehicles are able to make last minute lane changes to cut into the left-turn lane on Rest Church Road to US 11 northbound. Even with these adjustments, however, a considerable amount of northbound off-ramp traffic destined for US 11 northbound continues to stack in the shared left-through-right lane in the SimTraffic model. This likely results in inflated queueing estimates for northbound off-ramp, which are reflected in Table 2. As the queuing results of the model are reviewed, this should be considered as a potential limitation of the model. As shown, all study intersections operate at LOS D or better during the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours with queues contained within existing storage with the following exception: US 11/REST CHURCH ROAD (#4) The eastbound left-turn operates at LOS E with queues spilling back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I - 81 Northbound Ramps intersection during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The queues block the upstream end of the lane (i.e., Upstream Block Time) approximately 11 percent of the time during the weekday p.m. peak hour. POTENTIAL MITIGATION To alleviate the potential queue spill back and delays on the eastbound approach of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection, potential modifications to existing signal timing were considered to better accommodate demand on the eastbound approach. However, previous efforts illustrated signal re-timing alone (either to adjustments to cycle lengths and/or individual phase splits) is insufficient to alleviate the queue spillback without noticeable impacts to operations along US 11 (Reference 6). Given the existing 6-lane, undivided cross-section of Rest Church Road between the I-81 Northbound Ramps and US 11, adding storage capacity through an additional eastbound left-turn lane would require widening of the travelled way. This would potentially have substantial impacts to the existing gasoline station in the southwest quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection and/or the church in the northwest quadrant. It would also potentially affect the lane alignment with the bridge over I-81 to the west (i.e., potential impacts to signal poles/head locations and/or widening of the bridge). To prevent queue spillback during the weekday p.m. peak hour within the existing cross-section on Rest Church Road, capacity can be added by converting the existing eastbound through lane to a shared left - through lane. This change to the existing eastbound lane configuration would require several improvements: 335 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 18 ◼ Restriping of the eastbound approach lanes ◼ Conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to operate under “split” signal phasing ◼ Replacing the existing three-section signal head for the eastbound through lane with a four- section head (three ball indicators and one green left-turn arrow indicator) ◼ Potential widening of US 11 to the north of Rest Church Road to add a second northbound lane that ends/merges a minimum of 495 feet north of the existing commercial driveway on the east side of US 11. a. If US 11 is not widened, the second eastbound left -turn lane at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection would flow into a right-turn trap lane into the commercial property. ◼ Adjustments to coordination with the adjacent signalized intersections at the I-81 interchange. Figure 7 illustrates the proposed lane configuration at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection under this configuration. Figure 7. Proposed Lane Configuration – US 11/Rest Church Road – Existing Conditions Mitigation Table 3 illustrates anticipated operations of US 11/Rest Church Road after converting the eastbound through lane to a shared left-through lane and adjusting the Rest Church Road approaches to operate under split phasing. As shown, the eastbound queues are anticipated to contained within the existing lane storage (upstream blockage reduced to zero percent in SimTraffic). Minimal impacts are anticipated at adjacent intersections due to the conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to split-phased at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. Figure 8 illustrates the anticipated extents of these improvements. Appendix E contains the mitigated existing conditions level of service worksheets. It should also be noted this proposed lane configuration helps address some of the limitations of the SimTraffic model with respect to the northbound off-ramp from I-81. With two left-turning lanes from Rest Church Road onto US 11 northbound, vehicles from the northbound off-ramp can access one of the left-turn lanes on Rest Church Road from either lane on the off-ramp. This is reflected in the reduced forecast queues on the northbound off-ramp (Study Intersection #3) relative to existing conditions. 336 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 19 Table 3. Existing Conditions – Mitigation Strategy – Eastbound Shared Left-Through Lane at US 11/Rest Church Road Intersection Information PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Existing turn-lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps (#2) Signalized EB EBTR - B 126 13.8 EB Approach B - 13.8 WB WBL - C 211 33.4 WBT - A 111 5.6 WB Approach C - 20.0 SB SBLT - C 148 34.7 SBR 640’ C 88 30.8 SB Approach C - 33.1 Overall C - 21.3 Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps (#3) Signalized EB EBL - A 147 9.8 EBT - A 100 8.5 EB Approach A - 8.9 WB WBT - B 126 15.3 WBR - B 78 14.5 WB Approach B - 15.1 NB NBLTR - C 292 31.2 NBR 480’ C 245 27.8 NB Approach C - 28.8 Overall B - 19.1 US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road (#4) Signalized EB EBLT - D 188 35.7 EBTR - C 161 32.2 EB Approach C - 33.3 WB WBL 250’ C 36 34.1 WBT - D 104 35.1 WBR - C 67 33.9 WB Approach C - 34.5 NB NBL 150’ D 148 35.9 NBT - C 258 23.0 NBR 280’ B 21 17.0 NB Approach C - 25.4 SB SBL 240’ D 78 41.1 SBT - C 136 23.2 SBR 290’ C 74 21.1 SB Approach C - 24.2 Overall C - 28.9 1Maximum queues from SimTraffic reported for consistency with other operational summaries. 337 C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:00pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 08Converting Eastbound Through Lane to Shared Left-Through US 11/Rest Church Road Frederick County, VA 8 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N11 495' MIN RE-STRIPE EASTBOUND APPROACH BEGIN LANE DROP AFTER COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY RE-STRIPE EXISTING RIGHT-TURN LANE AS THROUGH LANE 100' 200' TAPER WIDEN US 11 TO DEVELOP RIGHT-TURN LANE ADJUST SIDEWALK TO REDEVELOP BUFFER REPLACE EXISTING 3-SECTION HEAD WITH 4-SECTION HEAD FOR SHARED LEFT-THROUGH LANE REST C H U R C H R D 81 0 Scale: 1" = 150' 15015075 338 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Existing Conditions Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 21 Traffic Impact Analysis 339 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 22 Transportation Impact Analysis The transportation impact analysis identifies how the study area’s transportation system will operate through total build out of the project. The Virginia Technology Park development is anticipated to be constructed and built by 2031. Traffic impacts of the proposed Virginia Technology Park development during the typical weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours were examined as follows: • Year 2031 background traffic conditions were developed by: o Applying a 1.0 percent compound annual growth rate to year 2025 traffic volumes on public roadways. o Adding trips associated with in-process developments to the study intersections. • Year 2031 background (pre-build-out) weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hour traffic conditions were analyzed at each of the study intersections. • Site-generated trips were estimated for the proposed site plan. • Site trip distribution patterns identified and confirmed through the scoping process were derived from existing traffic patterns and major trip origins and destinations in the study area. • Year 2031 total traffic conditions were analyzed at each of the study intersections and site-access driveways during the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours. YEAR 2031 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS In the 2031 background analysis, traffic operations prior to build-out of the proposed development are analyzed for the purposes of establishing a baseline against which to measure the specific impacts of the proposed development. Background growth in traffic volumes is attributed to regional growth in the area as well as any specific development within the study area. These components of growth are discussed below. REGIONAL GROWTH A 1.0 percent annual growth rate along public roadways was identified and confirmed through the scoping process to account for near-term regional traffic growth. This growth rate was compounded annually to forecast year 2031 background traffic volumes. IN-PROCESS DEVELOPMENTS Four in-process developments were identified at the time of scoping for build -out by 2031: ◼ Arogas Parcel – 22,570 square feet of shopping center in the northeast quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection ◼ Parcel 33-A-12 – 150,000 square feet of industrial development in the southwest quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection ◼ Parcel 33-9-4 – 8,810 square feet of warehousing development to the south of the site along the existing Zachary Ann Lane. This parcel would access Rest Church Road via Techology Center Road after build-out of the proposed Virginia Techology Park development. 340 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 23 ◼ Whitehall Commerce Center – Undeveloped portions of the larger site located west of US 11 along Rest Church Road include 162,000 square feet of industrial development. Trips to and from the in-process developments were assigned based on the assumptions made in previous and on-going traffic impact analyses for other developments (including the January 2019 Whitehall Commerce Center study). Appendix F contains the assumed trip generation and trip assignment for the in-process trips at study intersections. Trip generation for the in-process trips were developed using the standard reference Trip Generation, 11th Edition (Reference 7) published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS No new transportation improvements were identified to be completed by the build -out year of 2031 within the study area at the time of scoping. 2031 Background Traffic Conditions Traffic volumes under year 2031 background traffic conditions were developed by adding both the 1.0 percent compound annual growth rate and the in-process development trips to the existing traffic volumes. Figure 9 shows the overall intersection operational results of the year 2031 background traffic operations analysis for the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours. Figure 10 shows the lane group LOS. Table 4 summarizes the peak hour levels of service, SimTraffic maximum back of queue, and delay for each lane group by intersection. Appendix G contains the 2031 background traffic operational analysis worksheets. 341 SITE N C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:01pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 09Year 2031 Background Traffic Operations Weekday AM & PM Peak Hours Frederick County, VA 9 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM2 WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM3 WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM4 CM = INTERSECTION MOVEMENT (UNSIGNALIZED) LOS = INTERSECTION MOVEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (SIGNALIZED)/INTERSECTION MOVEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (UNSIGNALIZED) Del = INTERSECTION AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY (SIGNALIZED)/INTERSECTION MOVEMENT CONTROL DELAY (UNSIGNALIZED) V/C = INTERSECTION VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO 7276896231398103 159 143 16 120 42 LOS=C Del=25.7 V/C=0.44 5919573210 465 125 LOS=B Del=15.3 V/C=0.31154193129 149 397 127 LOS=C Del=33.1 V/C=0.53 1493461250174201393 144 73 23 209 102 LOS=D Del=42.9 V/C=0.88 93395104 215 366 193 LOS=B Del=16.1 V/C=0.34151182168 89 275 184 LOS=C Del=26.0 V/C=0.42 195101 1 3 106 CM=NB LOS=B Del=10.6 V/C=0.140101113 2 23 58 CM=NB LOS=B Del=10.7 V/C=0.14 342 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:01pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 10Year 2031 Background Lane Group Levels of Service Weekday AM & PM Peak Hours Frederick County, VA 10 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMX - LANE GROUP LEVEL OF SERVICE EDC C CB BCB B BA DC A CA E CDD CDCCCB C CA BCC A BA DC A CB C CDE CDC 343 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 26 Table 4. Year 2031 Background Traffic Conditions – Summary of Peak Hour Levels of Service, Maximum Back of Queue, and Delay for Each Lane Group by Intersection Intersection Information AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Existing turn-lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Route 669 (Rest Church Road)/ Zachary Ann Lane (#1) Two-way Stop- Controlled EB EBT - - 0 0.0 - 8 0.0 EBR - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 EB Approach - - 0.0 - - 0.0 WB WBL - A 45 7.9 A 4 7.4 WBT - A 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 WB Approach - - 2.3 - - 0.2 NB NBLR - B 129 10.7 B 102 10.6 NB Approach B - 10.7 B - 10.6 Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps (#2) Signalized EB EBTR - C 198 23.3 B 137 19.1 EB Approach C - 23.3 B - 19.1 WB WBL - D 356 50.0 D 312 36.6 WBT - A 115 4.6 B 199 14.5 WB Approach C - 39.0 C - 27.7 SB SBLT - C 186 33.6 C 176 31.5 SBR 640’ C 110 28.4 C 100 27.5 SB Approach C - 31.7 C - 30.1 Overall C - 33.1 C - 26.0 Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps (#3) Signalized EB EBL - A 154 9.2 B 180 11.4 EBT - A 126 8.4 A 118 9.9 EB Approach A - 8.6 B - 10.4 WB WBT - B 199 11.8 B 149 10.9 WBR - B 74 12.2 A 112 5.1 WB Approach B - 11.9 A - 8.9 NB NBLTR - C 241 32.7 C 473 30.3 NBR 480’ C 177 29.5 C 381 27.3 NB Approach C - 30.5 C - 28.1 Overall B - 15.3 B - 16.1 US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road (#4) Signalized EB EBL - C 182 29.8 E 237 56.8 EBTR - B 154 10.8 B 215 13.4 EB Approach B - 15.6 D - 41.3 WB WBL 250’ E 53 65.0 D 68 45.6 WBT - C 116 28.4 C 169 32.0 WBR - C 53 27.2 C 102 29.3 WB Approach C - 31.3 C - 32.1 NB NBL 150’ D 138 37.1 D 150 45.3 NBT - C 145 22.9 E 399 60.8 NBR 280’ C 18 21.1 C 73 25.2 NB Approach C - 29.3 E - 55.3 SB SBL 240’ D 121 46.5 D 87 41.1 SBT - C 178 28.7 D 158 47.0 SBR 290’ C 145 25.1 C 93 31.4 SB Approach C - 29.1 D - 38.9 Overall C - 25.7 D - 42.9 1 Maximum queues reported from SimTraffic due to 95th percentile queues from Synchro exceeding capacity at one or more signalized intersections. 344 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 27 As shown, critical movements at study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at LOS D or better with queues contained within the existing storage with the following exception: US 11/REST CHURCH ROAD (#4) Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound left-turn queues at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection are anticipated to spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The movement is forecast to operate near capacity at LOS E. The eastbound left-turn queues are forecast to block the upstream end of the lane (i.e., Upstream Block Time) approximately 25 percent of the time during the weekday p.m. peak hour. POTENTIAL MITIGATION Similar to existing conditions, it is not anticipated signal timing adjustments alone will fully mitigate the projected queue spillback between the eastbound approach of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection and the adjacent Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection. The mitigation improvements evaluated under existing conditions (shown in Figure 8) were also evaluated for their ability to mitigate this queue spillback under year 2031 background traffic conditions after the addition of regional and in- process development trips. Table 5 illustrates the anticipated traffic operations after implementing the shared left-through lane on the eastbound approach (and associated signal phasing updates) of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection under year 2031 background traffic conditions. Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound queues are anticipated to contained within the existing lane storage (upstream blockage reduced to zero percent in SimTraffic). Minimal impacts are anticipated at adjacent intersections due to the conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to split-phased at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. Appendix H contains the mitigated year 2031 background traffic conditions level of service worksheets. It should also be noted this proposed lane configuration helps address some of the limitations of the SimTraffic model with respect to the northbound off-ramp from I-81. With two left-turning lanes from Rest Church Road onto US 11 northbound, vehicles from the northbound off-ramp can access one of the left-turn lanes on Rest Church Road from either lane on the off-ramp. This is reflected in the reduced forecast queues on the northbound off-ramp (Study Intersection #3) relative to unmitigated year 2031 background conditions. 345 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 28 Table 5. Year 2031 Background Traffic Conditions – Mitigation Strategy – Eastbound Shared Left- Through Lane at US 11/Rest Church Road Intersection Information PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Existing turn-lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps (#2) Signalized EB EBTR - B 140 19.3 EB Approach B - 19.3 WB WBL - C 274 34.0 WBT - B 159 11.7 WB Approach C - 25.1 SB SBLT - C 182 32.3 SBR 640’ C 94 27.9 SB Approach C - 30.8 Overall C - 24.9 Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps (#3) Signalized EB EBL - B 154 13.2 EBT - B 111 11.9 EB Approach B - 12.3 WB WBT - B 183 16.5 WBR - B 123 15.5 WB Approach B - 16.1 NB NBLTR - C 314 30.5 NBR 480’ C 272 27.3 NB Approach C - 28.2 Overall B - 19.6 US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road (#4) Signalized EB EBLT - D 203 39.7 EBTR - C 191 33.5 EB Approach D - 35.6 WB WBL 250’ C 46 33.2 WBT - D 140 39.8 WBR - C 76 32.7 WB Approach D - 37.2 NB NBL 150’ D 149 42.4 NBT - C 327 25.1 NBR 280’ B 56 17.4 NB Approach C - 30.0 SB SBL 240’ D 85 40.7 SBT - C 143 25.7 SBR 290’ C 81 22.8 SB Approach C - 26.1 Overall C - 32.2 1Maximum queues from SimTraffic reported for consistency with other operational summaries. 346 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 29 YEAR 2031 TOTAL TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The year 2031 total traffic conditions evaluate the anticipated traffic operations of the roadway network after build-out of the proposed Virginia Technology Park. These conditions include the regional growth and trips from in-process developments added under year 2031 background traffic conditions. Proposed Development The proposed Virginia Technology Park development consists of eleven data center buildings totaling to 2,350,000 square feet across two campuses. The development also includes three substations and 24,000 square feet of office/administration buildings that directly support the data center operations (i.e., the same end user). Access to the site is proposed via a new roadway (Technology Park Road), which would connect to the southern portion of the existing Zachary Ann Lane. Technology Park Road would serve all trips to the proposed site and parcels south of the site on Zachary Ann Lane. All access to the Pilot/Flying J Travel Center would remain in their current locations with egress from the current alignment of Zachary Ann Lane being restricted to right-out only through the addition of a channelizing island to reinforce the truck restrictions to the west on Rest Church Road. Figure 11 illustrates the assumed lane configurations and traffic control devices under year 2031 total traffic conditions. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation estimates for the proposed development were developed using data collected at similar data center developments in Virginia (see approved scoping document in Appendix A for more details). The trip generation rates established from these similar developments include trips generated by ancillary uses on site (e.g., the office and administration buildings). Table 6 summarizes the trip generation estimates for the proposed development. Table 6. Estimated Trip Generation Land Use ITE Code Units Weekday Daily Peak Hour Adjacent Street Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Data Center -- 2,350.000 1,000 S.F. 1,763 212 117 95 71 21 50 Total Trips 1,763 212 117 95 71 21 50 As shown in Table 6, the development is estimated to generate approximately 1,763 weekday daily trips, 212 weekday a.m. (117 in, 95 out), and 71 weekday p.m. (21 in, 50 out) peak hour trips when built out in year 2031. 347 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 30 Trip Distribution and Trip Assignment Trip distribution estimates for the proposed project were developed based on anticipated future travel patterns observed near the site and major origin/destination patterns in the site vicinity. Figure 12 illustrates the estimated trip distribution pattern for site trips, which was confirmed through the scoping process. Figure 13 illustrates the assignment of site-generated trips to the surrounding roadway network. Figure 14 illustrates the anticipated reassignment of trips to/from parcels along the southern portion of Zachary Ann Lane that would be directed to the new Technology Park Road after build-out of the proposed site. 2031 Total Traffic Conditions The year 2031 total traffic conditions analysis forecasts how the transportation system in the study area will operate after build-out of the proposed development. The site-generated trips shown in Figure 13 and the reassignment of trips from the existing Zachary Ann Lane to Technology Park Road shown in Figure 14 were then added to year 2031 background traffic volumes shown in Figure 9. Figure 15 illustrates the anticipated traffic operations at study intersection under year 2031 total traffic conditions. Figure 16 shows the lane group LOS for the weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak hours. Table 7 summarizes the Synchro 11 peak hour levels of service, SimTraffic maximum back of queue, and delay for each lane group by intersection. Appendix I contains the 2031 total traffic operational analysis worksheets. 348 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:01pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 11Assumed Year 2031 Total Traffic Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices Frederick County, VA 11 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 32 5 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 V I R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A - STOP SIGN - TRAFFIC SIGNAL 2 3 4 PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 1 5 1 349 SITE N C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:01pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 12Assumed Site Trip Distribution Frederick County, VA 12 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure - ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R DZACHARY ANN LNRUEBUCK RD V I R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 350 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:01pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 13Site-Generated Trips Frederick County, VA 13 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 32 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A 5 PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 1 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM1WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM5 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM3WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM2 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM4 90 111 5347 43 58 5343 4 5 322 2 5906 111 47 20 924 23 11 923 1 2 111 3471 20 351 SITE H:\31\31757 - Fruit Hill Development\design\_Models\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 11, 2025 - 4:19pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 14Reassignment of Existing Trips from Southern Portion of Zachary Ann Lane to Technology Park Road Frederick County, VA 14 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 32 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A 5 PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 1 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM1WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM5 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM3WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM2 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM4 -1-1515 -1 115-1 1 -1 -1111 -2 -1 1 11-2 2 1 NO REASSIGNMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO REASSIGNMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO REASSIGNMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO REASSIGNMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO REASSIGNMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO REASSIGNMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION 352 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:01pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 15Year 2031 Total Traffic Conditions Weekday AM & PM Peak Hours Frederick County, VA 15 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 32 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A 5 PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 1 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM1WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM5 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM3WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM2 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM4 1503461250174202393 144 74 23 209 102LOS=D Del=43.0 V/C=0.88 102395127 216 368 193 LOS=B Del=16.2 V/C=0.40151191192 112 275 195 LOS=C Del=25.3 V/C=0.43 80163 0 3 126 CM=NB LOS=B Del=11.3 V/C=0.13 462101 2 20 106 CM=NB LOS=A Del=9.2 V/C=0.08 7576896231400105 159 145 16 120 42LOS=C Del=25.8 V/C=0.44 112195116 214 470 125 LOS=B Del=17.6 V/C=0.421541146176 192 397 185 LOS=C Del=29.5 V/C=0.56 90214 0 22 170 CM=NB LOS=B Del=11.8 V/C=0.15 5101113 8 112 58 CM=NB LOS=A Del=9.6 V/C=0.13 CM = INTERSECTION MOVEMENT (UNSIGNALIZED) LOS = INTERSECTION MOVEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (SIGNALIZED)/INTERSECTION MOVEMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (UNSIGNALIZED) Del = INTERSECTION AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY (SIGNALIZED)/INTERSECTION MOVEMENT CONTROL DELAY (UNSIGNALIZED) V/C = INTERSECTION VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO 353 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 16Year 2031 Total Traffic Lane Group Levels of Service Weekday AM & PM Peak Hours Frederick County, VA 16 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 Figure N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 32 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A 5 PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY PARK RD 1 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM1WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM5 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM3WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM2 WEEKDAY AM WEEKDAY PM4 EDB C CA BCB B DC B CA E CDD CDC CCB C CA BCC A DC B CB C CDE CDC BA BA AA AA 354 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 37 Table 7. 2031 Total Traffic Conditions – Summary of Peak Hour Levels of Service, Maximum Back of Queue, and Delay for Each Lane Group by Intersection Intersection Information AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Turn- lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Route 669 (Rest Church Road)/ Zachary Ann Lane (#1) Two-way Stop-Controlled EB EBT - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 EBR - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 EB Approach - - 0.0 - - 0.0 WB WBL 200’ A 62 8.2 A 10 7.6 WBT - - 0 0.0 - 0 0.0 WB Approach - - 0.9 - - 0.2 NB NBR - B 133 11.8 B 131 11.3 NB Approach B - 11.8 B - 11.3 Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps (#2) Signalized EB EBTR - C 209 24.0 B 166 19.4 EB Approach C - 24.0 B - 19.4 WB WBL - D 339 43.1 D 326 35.6 WBT - A 159 8.2 B 200 14.0 WB Approach C - 32.0 C - 26.6 SB SBLT - C 186 33.6 C 183 31.5 SBR 640’ C 127 28.9 C 108 27.5 SB Approach C - 31.3 C - 30.0 Overall C - 29.5 C - 25.3 Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps (#3) Signalized EB EBL - B 218 12.7 B 207 12.0 EBT - A 117 9.6 A 128 9.8 EB Approach B - 10.7 B - 10.6 WB WBT - B 204 15.2 B 261 11.5 WBR - B 82 15.7 A 102 5.5 WB Approach B - 15.3 A - 9.4 NB NBLTR - C 322 33.2 C 554 30.3 NBR 480’ C 263 26.4 C 424 26.8 NB Approach C - 29.4 C - 27.8 Overall B - 17.6 B - 16.2 US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road (#4) Signalized EB EBL - C 189 30.5 E 238 56.9 EBTR - B 148 11.0 B 221 13.9 EB Approach B - 16.0 D - 41.5 WB WBL 250’ E 52 65.0 D 60 45.6 WBT - C 126 28.4 C 172 32.0 WBR - C 54 27.2 C 96 29.3 WB Approach C - 31.3 C - 32.1 NB NBL 150’ D 139 37.8 D 150 45.5 NBT - C 130 22.9 E 459 60.8 NBR 280’ C 18 21.1 C 125 25.5 NB Approach C - 29.8 D - 55.4 SB SBL 240’ D 140 46.5 D 85 41.1 SBT - C 191 28.7 D 164 47.0 SBR 290’ C 156 25.1 C 107 31.4 SB Approach C - 29.1 D - 38.9 Overall C - 25.8 D - 43.0 355 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 38 Intersection Information AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Turn- lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) Two-way Stop-Controlled EB EBTR - A 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 EB Approach - - 0.0 - - 0.0 WB WBLT - A 56 7.7 A 40 7.5 WB Approach - - 5.1 - - 1.2 NB NBLR - A 64 9.6 A 63 9.2 NB Approach A - 9.6 A - 9.2 1 Maximum queues reported from SimTraffic due to 95th percentile queues from Synchro exceeding capacity at one or more signalized intersections. As shown, critical movements at study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at LOS D or better with queues contained within the proposed storage with the following exception: US 11/REST CHURCH ROAD (#4) Similar to existing and year 2031 background traffic conditions, the queues for the eastbound left-turn at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection are projected to spill back to the upstream Rest Church Road/I - 81 Ramps intersection during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The site is not anticipated to add any trips to this movement during the weekday p.m. peak hour. MITIGATION The mitigation strategies tested under existing and year 2031 background traffic conditions (shown in Figure 8) were evaluated under year 2031 total traffic conditions to test their ability to continue to offset the queue spill back of eastbound left-turn movements from the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection to the upstream Rest Church Road/I-81 Ramps intersection. Table 8 illustrates the anticipated operations of the signalized network after converting the eastbound through lane to a shared left -through lane and updating the minor street approaches to split phasing at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound queues are anticipated to contained within the existing lane storage (upstream blockage reduced to zero percent in SimTraffic). Minimal impacts are anticipated at adjacent intersections due to the conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to split-phased at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. Appendix J contains the mitigated year 2031 total traffic conditions level of service worksheets. It should also be noted this proposed lane configuration helps address some of the limitations of the SimTraffic model with respect to the northbound off-ramp from I-81. With two left-turning lanes from Rest Church Road onto US 11 northbound, vehicles from the northbound off-ramp can access one of the left-turn lanes on Rest Church Road from either lane on the off-ramp. This is reflected in the reduced forecast queues on the northbound off-ramp (Study Intersection #3) relative to unmitigated year 2031 total conditions. 356 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 39 Table 8. Year 2031 Total Traffic Conditions – Mitigation Strategy – Eastbound Shared Left-Through Lane at US 11/Rest Church Road Intersection Information PM Peak Hour Intersection (#) Traffic Control Approach Lane Group Existing turn-lane lengths LOS Back of Queue (feet)1 Delay (sec) Rest Church Road/I-81 Southbound Ramps (#2) Signalized EB EBTR - B 170 19.4 EB Approach B - 19.4 WB WBL - D 276 36.3 WBT - B 160 11.3 WB Approach C - 25.9 SB SBLT - C 174 32.3 SBR 640’ C 110 27.9 SB Approach C - 30.7 Overall C - 25.1 Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps (#3) Signalized EB EBL - B 154 12.6 EBT - B 111 10.6 EB Approach B - 11.3 WB WBT - C 183 21.4 WBR - D 123 41.9 WB Approach C - 28.4 NB NBLTR - C 314 31.1 NBR 480’ C 272 27.2 NB Approach C - 28.3 Overall C - 24.2 US 11 (Martinsburg Pike)/Rest Church Road (#4) Signalized EB EBLT - C 203 34.8 EBTR - D 191 49.9 EB Approach D - 44.9 WB WBL 250’ C 46 33.5 WBT - D 140 40.3 WBR - C 76 33.0 WB Approach D - 37.6 NB NBL 150’ D 149 40.4 NBT - C 327 25.5 NBR 280’ B 56 17.7 NB Approach C - 29.7 SB SBL 240’ D 85 41.1 SBT - C 143 26.7 SBR 290’ C 81 23.5 SB Approach C - 26.9 Overall D - 35.4 1Maximum queues from SimTraffic reported for consistency with other operational summaries. 357 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 40 TURN LANE ANALYSIS The need for left- and right-turn lanes on Rest Church Road onto the proposed Technology Park Road (Study Intersection #5) were evaluated with respect to VDOT turn lane warrants established in Appendix F of the VDOT Road Design Manual (RDM – Reference 8). Right-Turn Lane Warrant Per Appendix F of the VDOT RDM, right-turn lanes on a two-lane roadway are required if the warrants in Figure 3-26 are met. Table 9 illustrates the applicable volumes required for the right-turn lane warrant analysis, while Figure 17 illustrates the application of these volumes to Figure 3-26 of the VDOT RDM. As shown, a right-turn lane is not projected to be warranted on Rest Church Road at Technology Park Road. Table 9. Eastbound Volumes – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) – Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours Peak Hour Year 2031 Total Traffic Volumes PHV Advancing Total (vph) PHV Right-Turns (vph) Weekday AM 121 8 Weekday PM 103 2 Figure 17. Right-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) 358 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 41 Left-Turn Lane Warrants Per Appendix F of the VDOT RDM, left-turn lanes on a two-lane roadway are required if the warrants in Figures 3-4 through 3-21 are met. The percentage of left turns in each approach volume was rounded to the nearest five percent to apply the nomographs. The posted speed limit of Rest Church Road changes from 35 miles-per-hour to 45 miles-per-hour near the proposed Technology Park Road. To be conservative, the nomographs for a 50 mile-per-hour design speed were used. Table 10 illustrates the applicable volumes required for the left-turn lane warrant analysis, while Figure 18 illustrates the application of these volumes to Figure 3-15 of the VDOT RDM. As shown, a left-turn lane is not projected to be warranted on Rest Church Road at Technology Park Road. Table 10. Westbound Volumes – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) – Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours Peak Hour Year 2031 Total Traffic Volumes Advancing Total (vph) Opposing Volume (vph) Weekday AM 170 121 Weekday PM 126 103 Figure 18. Left-Turn Lane Warrant Analysis – Rest Church Road/Technology Park Road (#5) 359 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Transportation Impact Analysis Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 42 ACCESS MANAGEMENT EVALUATION An evaluation of the proposed entrances to the Virginia Technology Park development was performed with respect to VDOT’s Access Management policies. Figure 19 illustrates the proposed spacing of the site entrances with respect to adjacent intersections and commercial access points, as well as the interchange with I-81. Based on Table 2-3 of the RDM, the proposed Technology Park Road should be located a minimum of 1,320 feet from the end of the I-81 ramp terminal. As shown in Figure 19, the current planned location of Technology Park Road is located approximately 1,325 feet from the edge of the ramp terminal (no turn lanes present as shown in Figure 2-9 of the RDM). Based on Table 2-2 of the RDM, the proposed Technology Park Road should be a minimum of 50 feet from adjacent entrances on Rest Church Road (local street). As shown in Figure 19, the proposed location of Technology Park Road is located greater than 50 feet from any adjacent entrance. 360 NC:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: 19 Access Management EvaluationFrederick County, VA19Virginia Technology ParkJune 2025FigureTECHNOLOGY PARK ROADCUL-DE-SAC1,325'1,320'50'50'657'X'X'- MINIMUM SPACING FROM INTERCHANGE RAMP- PROPOSED SPACING- MINIMUM SPACING FROM COMMERCIAL ENTRANCESX'EGRESS RESTRICTED TORIGHT-OUT ONLY361 Conclusions and Recommendations 362 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Conclusions and Recommendations Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 45 Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the results of the transportation impact analysis, the transportation system can accommodate full build-out of the proposed development. The findings of this analysis and our recommendations are discussed below. Existing Conditions ◼ All intersections currently operate at LOS D or better with queues stored within existing lanes with the following exception: o US 11/Rest Church Road (Study Intersection #4): The eastbound left-turn queues spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The queues block the upstream end of the lane approximately 11 percent of the time during the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ Signal re-timing alone (i.e., no physical changes to the travelled way) is not anticipated to fully prevent the spill back of eastbound left-turn movements at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. ▪ Queue spillbacks can be mitigated by adding capacity to the eastbound left-turn movement through conversion of the existing eastbound through lane to a shared left/through lane. This would also require: • Restriping of the eastbound approach lanes • Conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to operate under “split” signal phasing • Replacing the existing three-section signal head for the eastbound through lane with a four-section head (three ball indicators and one green left-turn arrow indicator) • Potential widening of US 11 to the north of Rest Church Road to add a second northbound lane that ends/merges a minimum of 495 feet north of the existing commercial driveway on the east side of US 11. • Adjustments to coordination with the adjacent signalized intersections at the I-81 interchange. ▪ If implemented, the eastbound queues would be anticipated to be contained within the existing lane storage. Minimal impacts are anticipated at adjacent intersections due to the conversion of the Rest Church Road approaches to split-phased at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection. 2031 Background (Pre-Build-Out) Traffic Conditions ◼ A 1.0 percent annual growth rate was applied to traffic volumes on public roadways account for near- term regional traffic growth. ◼ Four in-process developments were identified at the time of scoping for build -out by 2031: 363 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Conclusions and Recommendations Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 46 o Arogas Parcel – 22,570 square feet of shopping center in the northeast quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection o Parcel 33-A-12 – 150,000 square feet of industrial development in the southwest quadrant of the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection o Parcel 33-9-4 – 8,810 square feet of warehousing development to the south of the site along the existing Zachary Ann Lane. This parcel would access Rest Church Road via Techology Center Road after build-out of the proposed Virginia Techology Park development. o Whitehall Commerce Center – Undeveloped portions of the larger site located west of US 11 along Rest Church Road include 162,000 square feet of industrial development. ◼ No new transportation improvements were identified to be completed by the build-out year of 2031 within the study area. ◼ Under year 2031 background traffic conditions (pre-build-out), study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at LOS D or better with queues contained within the existing storage with the following exception: o US 11/Rest Church Road (Study Intersection #4): Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound left-turn queues are projected to spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I- 81 Northbound Ramps intersection for approximately 25 percent of the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ Converting the eastbound through lane to a shared left/through lane and making the associated signal improvements is anticipated to reduce queuing on the eastbound approach to within the existing lane storage. 2031 Total (Post-Build-Out)Traffic Conditions ◼ The proposed Virginia Technology Park development consists of eleven data center buildings totaling to 2,350,000 square feet across two campuses. The development also includes three substations and 24,000 square feet of office/administration buildings that directly support the data center operations (i.e., the same end user). ◼ Access to the site is proposed via a new roadway (Technology Park Road), which would connect to the southern portion of the existing Zachary Ann Lane. Technology Park Road would serve all trips to the proposed site and parcels south of the site on Zachary Ann Lane. ◼ All access to the Pilot/Flying J Travel Center would remain in their current locations with egress from the current alignment of Zachary Ann Lane being restricted to right -out only through the addition of a channelizing island to reinforce the truck restrictions to the west on Rest Church Road. ◼ The development is estimated to generate approximately 1,763 weekday daily trips, 212 weekday a.m. (117 in, 95 out), and 71 weekday p.m. (21 in, 50 out) peak hour trips when built out in year 2031. ◼ Under year 2031 total traffic conditions (post-build-out), critical movements at study intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at LOS D or better with queues contained within the existing/proposed storage with the following exception: 364 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park Conclusions and Recommendations Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 47 o US 11/Rest Church Road (Study Intersection #4): Similar to existing conditions, the eastbound left-turn queues are projected to spill back to the adjacent Rest Church Road/I- 81 Northbound Ramps intersection for a portion of the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ The site is not anticipated to add any trips to this movement during the weekday p.m. peak hour. ▪ Similar to existing and year 2031 background traffic conditions, converting the eastbound through lane to a shared left/through lane and making the associated signal improvements is anticipated to reduce queuing on the eastbound approach to within the existing lane storage. Turn Lane Warrant Evaluation ◼ An evaluation of VDOT left- and right-turn lane warrants for two-lane roadways illustrated turn lanes are not forecast to be warranted on Rest Church Road at the proposed Technology Park Road under year 2031 total traffic conditions. Access Management Evaluation ◼ An evaluation of the proposed location of Technology Park Road was performed with respect to VDOT’s Access Management policies. Based on the minimum spacing standards in Appendix F of VDOT’s Road Design Manual (RDM), the proposed location of Technology Park Road exceeds spacing requirements from adjacent intersections, commercial entrances, and interchanges. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the projected traffic operations within the study area, the following improvements are recommended for future consideration by VDOT and Frederick County: ◼ Convert the eastbound through lane at the US 11/Rest Church Road intersection to a shared left/through lane. Appropriate adjustments to signal timing/coordination on Rest Church Road and roadway improvements to US 11 will be required, including converting the Rest Church Road approaches at US 11 to split phasing. o The need for this mitigation strategy is shown to be warranted under existing conditions. The site-related trips added to the network at this intersection represent less than 0.7 percent of the total entering vehicles upon build-out in year 2031. 365 June 2025 Virginia Technology Park References Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Page 48 References 1. Frederick County. The Comprehensive Plan. Accessed June 11, 2025. https://www.fcva.us/departments/planning-development/the-comprehensive- plan 2. Frederick County. Frederick County Zoning Map. Accessed June 2, 2025. https://fredcogis.fcva.us/PlanningAccessTerminal/ 3. Virginia Department of Transportation. Pathways for Planning Portal. Accessed June 2, 2025: https://vdotp4p.com/ 4. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. 2016. 5. Virginia Department of Transportation. Traffic Operations and Safety Analysis Manual – Version 2.0. February 2020. 6. Kittelson and Associates, Inc. Fruit Hill Property TIA. January 2023. 7. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation, 11th Edition. 2021. 8. Virginia Department of Transportation. Road Design Manual. July 2021. 366 Appendix A Scoping Letter 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 Appendix B May 2025 Turning Movement Counts 386 Type of peak hour being reported: User-Defined Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: Zachary Ann Ln -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986601 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 74 96 0.950.95 53 98 2 21 191 0 0 95 23 95 Peak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AMPeak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15-Min: 7:15 AM -- 7:30 AMPeak 15-Min: 7:15 AM -- 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 11.3 0 0 20.3 6.3 11.3 6.1 0 42.9 47.6 0 0 89.5 39.1 89.5 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Zachary Ann Ln Zachary Ann Ln (Northbound)(Northbound) Zachary Ann Ln Zachary Ann Ln (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 6:00 AM 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 4 7 0 0 0 32 6:15 AM 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 40 6:30 AM 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2 0 0 9 10 0 0 0 50 6:45 AM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 2 0 0 13 6 0 0 0 53 175 7:00 AM 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 5 14 0 0 0 63 206 7:15 AM 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 6 15 0 0 0 70 236 7:30 AM 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 6 11 0 0 0 68 254 7:45 AM 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2 0 0 4 13 0 0 0 66 267 8:00 AM 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 2 9 0 0 0 54 258 8:15 AM 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 1 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 46 234 8:30 AM 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 1 0 0 5 6 0 0 0 46 212 8:45 AM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 4 10 0 0 0 42 188 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 0 0 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 24 60 0 0 0 280 Heavy Trucks 0 0 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 4 0 104 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 5:59 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 1 of 4 387 Type of peak hour being reported: User-Defined Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: I-81 SB Ramps -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986603 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 156 0 87 1 68 205 0 0 475 107 0.930.93 118 247 140 357 175 0 0 0 498 0 Peak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AMPeak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15-Min: 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AMPeak 15-Min: 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AM 21.8 0 35.6 100 2.9 36.6 0 0 12.2 41.1 37.3 38.1 35.7 3.9 26.3 0 0 0 13.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At I-81 SB Ramps I-81 SB Ramps (Northbound)(Northbound) I-81 SB Ramps I-81 SB Ramps (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 4 0 7 0 10 16 0 6 82 20 0 0 0 155 6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 6 0 8 0 28 15 0 5 83 17 0 0 0 173 6:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 10 0 7 0 25 26 0 3 85 25 0 0 0 193 6:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 12 0 10 0 26 25 0 3 54 22 0 0 0 176 697 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 20 0 8 0 18 23 0 15 97 28 0 0 0 235 777 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 10 0 9 0 30 32 0 7 93 26 0 0 0 221 825 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 17 0 7 0 33 30 0 3 75 32 0 0 0 209 841 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 8 0 8 0 26 26 0 4 92 32 0 0 0 213 878 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12 1 6 0 10 0 31 29 0 3 76 24 0 0 0 192 835 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 10 0 3 0 34 22 0 1 63 26 0 0 0 175 789 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 8 0 6 0 25 17 0 3 63 19 0 0 0 158 738 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 8 0 6 0 23 21 0 4 52 26 0 0 0 158 683 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 112 0 32 0 72 152 0 60 388 112 0 0 0 1032 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 4 0 52 0 28 32 16 48 0 180 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 5:59 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 2 of 4 388 Type of peak hour being reported: User-Defined Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: I-81 NB Ramps -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986605 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 0 169 0 0 0 475 69 97 516 108 0.980.98 419 177 0 0 211 56 3 103 0 162 Peak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AMPeak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15-Min: 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AMPeak 15-Min: 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AM 0 30.8 0 0 0 11.8 53.6 13.4 7.4 7.4 6 25.4 0 0 6.2 55.4 66.7 4.9 0 23.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At I-81 NB Ramps I-81 NB Ramps (Northbound)(Northbound) I-81 NB Ramps I-81 NB Ramps (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 6:00 AM 11 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 7 13 0 0 0 0 85 7 0 0 133 6:15 AM 10 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 19 20 0 0 0 0 91 11 0 1 168 6:30 AM 10 1 12 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 20 17 0 0 0 0 99 19 0 2 196 6:45 AM 8 0 15 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 14 39 0 0 0 0 67 22 0 1 187 684 7:00 AM 18 0 14 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 16 29 0 0 0 0 111 14 0 5 219 770 7:15 AM 11 0 7 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 20 22 0 0 0 0 109 17 0 3 207 809 7:30 AM 13 1 13 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 16 29 0 0 0 0 97 30 0 3 215 828 7:45 AM 14 2 14 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 17 28 0 0 0 0 102 24 0 1 214 855 8:00 AM 11 0 6 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 14 29 0 0 0 0 95 5 0 3 175 811 8:15 AM 16 1 6 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 16 33 0 0 0 0 73 13 0 5 172 776 8:30 AM 12 1 8 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 11 24 0 0 0 0 68 9 0 6 150 711 8:45 AM 16 2 10 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 17 29 0 0 0 0 58 16 0 1 163 660 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 72 0 104 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 64 116 0 0 0 0 444 76 0 20 944 Heavy Trucks 36 0 12 0 0 0 28 8 0 0 28 8 120 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 5:59 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 3 of 4 389 Type of peak hour being reported: User-Defined Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: US 11 -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986607 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 664 182 375 209 80 520 75 39 140 75 0.980.98 88 216 66 13 158 57 68 3 288 128 Peak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AMPeak-Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15-Min: 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AMPeak 15-Min: 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AM 3.5 4.9 2.9 4.3 3.8 6.7 2.7 0 6.4 4 10.2 5.1 9.1 0 3.8 26.3 10.3 0 5.2 17.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At US 11 US 11 (Northbound)(Northbound) US 11 US 11 (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 6:00 AM 8 7 1 0 1 14 51 51 0 23 5 8 6 0 3 3 11 2 0 1 195 6:15 AM 7 20 0 0 1 17 53 48 0 32 15 13 6 0 5 2 15 3 0 2 239 6:30 AM 10 17 0 0 0 15 53 43 0 53 19 14 6 0 6 3 13 2 0 1 255 6:45 AM 10 20 0 0 3 23 63 28 0 39 29 26 9 0 8 5 12 6 0 3 284 973 7:00 AM 9 15 0 0 0 24 61 51 0 42 17 25 6 0 5 2 28 4 0 3 292 1070 7:15 AM 17 15 1 0 2 19 55 48 0 47 14 15 13 0 8 3 19 5 0 0 281 1112 7:30 AM 19 17 0 0 0 21 46 41 0 49 28 15 9 0 7 4 21 7 0 7 291 1148 7:45 AM 12 21 0 0 0 16 47 54 0 43 16 20 5 0 13 4 20 10 0 3 284 1148 8:00 AM 7 22 1 0 0 11 38 47 0 32 20 13 5 0 8 3 19 5 0 1 232 1088 8:15 AM 12 23 0 0 0 12 43 32 0 33 33 11 4 0 1 2 12 6 0 5 229 1036 8:30 AM 9 33 0 0 0 20 46 41 0 25 23 10 6 0 4 4 10 8 0 7 246 991 8:45 AM 14 28 0 0 0 7 42 25 0 28 20 14 10 0 8 2 8 5 0 7 218 925 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 36 60 0 0 0 96 244 372 0 168 68 100 44 0 20 8 112 28 0 12 1368 Heavy Trucks 8 16 0 0 20 4 0 4 4 0 16 0 72 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 5:59 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 4 of 4 390 Type of peak hour being reported: System-wide Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: Zachary Ann Ln -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986602 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 0 93 91 0.900.90 90 92 1 3 179 1 0 88 4 89 Peak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PMPeak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:00 PM -- 5:15 PMPeak 15-Min: 5:00 PM -- 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4.4 0 0 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 0 0 44.7 0 0 86.4 0 85.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At Zachary Ann Ln Zachary Ann Ln (Northbound)(Northbound) Zachary Ann Ln Zachary Ann Ln (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 4:00 PM 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 1 0 0 3 21 0 0 0 67 4:15 PM 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 68 4:30 PM 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 1 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 70 4:45 PM 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 1 0 2 24 0 0 0 70 275 5:00 PM 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 1 16 0 0 0 76 284 5:15 PM 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 1 24 0 0 0 64 280 5:30 PM 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 1 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 68 278 5:45 PM 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 1 25 0 0 0 66 274 6:00 PM 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 1 20 0 0 0 63 261 6:15 PM 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 42 239 6:30 PM 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 1 29 0 0 0 61 232 6:45 PM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 1 27 0 0 0 52 218 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 0 0 128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 4 64 0 0 0 304 Heavy Trucks 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 112 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 7:15 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 1 of 4 391 Type of peak hour being reported: System-wide Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: I-81 SB Ramps -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986604 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 185 0 77 1 107 232 0 0 332 154 0.960.96 155 237 83 177 261 0 0 0 261 0 Peak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PMPeak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PMPeak 15-Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PM 15.7 0 29.9 0 5.6 31.5 0 0 17.2 29.2 32.3 30 31.3 4 19.5 0 0 0 12.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At I-81 SB Ramps I-81 SB Ramps (Northbound)(Northbound) I-81 SB Ramps I-81 SB Ramps (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 15 0 7 0 39 19 0 4 16 47 0 0 0 170 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 22 0 2 0 30 21 0 3 36 33 0 0 0 165 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 9 0 10 0 39 21 0 8 33 41 0 0 0 180 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 23 1 9 0 8 0 32 12 0 2 33 44 0 0 0 164 679 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 6 0 11 0 42 25 0 4 36 28 0 0 0 175 684 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 15 0 10 0 39 10 0 11 44 43 0 0 0 197 716 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 21 1 6 0 6 0 36 11 0 7 58 44 0 0 0 190 726 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 17 0 6 0 37 11 0 4 39 40 0 0 0 192 754 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 18 0 6 0 36 19 0 4 36 33 0 0 0 178 757 6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 12 0 11 0 20 14 0 2 46 31 0 0 0 158 718 6:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 15 0 7 0 28 15 0 2 32 38 0 0 0 153 681 6:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 18 0 10 0 20 12 0 5 19 37 0 0 0 138 627 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min FlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 40 0 156 84 0 44 176 172 0 0 0 872 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 60 20 12 60 0 188 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 7:15 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 2 of 4 392 Type of peak hour being reported: System-wide Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: I-81 NB Ramps -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986606 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 0 197 0 0 0 341 97 99 352 163 0.970.97 253 260 0 0 491 88 1 328 0 417 Peak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PMPeak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:45 PM -- 6:00 PMPeak 15-Min: 5:45 PM -- 6:00 PM 0 27.9 0 0 0 16.7 47.4 8.1 6 3.1 5.1 19.6 0 0 2 50 100 1.5 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At I-81 NB Ramps I-81 NB Ramps (Northbound)(Northbound) I-81 NB Ramps I-81 NB Ramps (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 4:00 PM 31 0 47 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 25 34 0 0 0 0 28 22 0 7 217 4:15 PM 21 0 43 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 18 34 0 0 0 0 51 22 0 10 219 4:30 PM 23 0 43 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 21 32 0 0 0 0 59 25 0 5 236 4:45 PM 29 1 47 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 20 40 0 0 0 0 44 14 0 9 238 910 5:00 PM 19 0 54 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 28 37 0 0 0 0 53 19 0 6 248 941 5:15 PM 25 0 41 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 25 39 0 0 0 0 63 14 0 7 255 977 5:30 PM 25 1 38 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 20 38 0 0 0 0 75 20 0 8 260 1001 5:45 PM 19 0 49 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 24 49 0 0 0 0 62 17 0 8 266 1029 6:00 PM 20 0 46 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 20 38 0 0 0 0 52 17 0 6 227 1008 6:15 PM 21 1 40 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 9 34 0 0 0 0 66 13 0 9 235 988 6:30 PM 21 0 31 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 19 24 0 0 0 0 39 6 0 5 168 896 6:45 PM 17 1 23 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 13 29 0 1 0 0 41 10 0 2 160 790 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 76 0 348 0 152 0 0 0 0 0 96 196 0 0 0 0 248 100 0 32 1248 Heavy Trucks 32 0 8 0 0 0 48 4 0 0 12 12 116 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 7:15 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 3 of 4 393 Type of peak hour being reported: System-wide Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: LOCATION: US 11 -- Rest Church Rd QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16986608 CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Frederick, VA DATE: DATE: Wed, May 7 2025 400 719 189 166 45 353 318 88 184 125 0.950.95 82 501 58 14 180 82 313 10 238 405 Peak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PMPeak-Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PM Peak 15-Min: 5:45 PM -- 6:00 PMPeak 15-Min: 5:45 PM -- 6:00 PM 0.8 1.3 0.5 1.2 0 4.2 2.5 0 2.7 0.8 6.1 1.8 0 0 0.6 11 0.3 0 0.8 2.5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A R* = RTOR 15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At US 11 US 11 (Northbound)(Northbound) US 11 US 11 (Southbound)(Southbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Eastbound)(Eastbound) Rest Church RdRest Church Rd (Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* 4:00 PM 18 84 0 0 0 8 23 13 0 15 78 10 7 0 9 0 11 6 0 6 288 4:15 PM 14 91 0 0 0 4 29 23 0 31 70 10 8 0 7 0 12 7 0 3 309 4:30 PM 27 74 0 0 1 8 43 9 0 33 75 10 6 0 13 5 21 9 0 10 344 4:45 PM 17 100 1 0 0 11 24 15 0 23 87 23 9 0 5 6 12 7 0 5 345 1286 5:00 PM 17 85 2 0 1 3 50 14 0 30 87 21 10 0 7 1 17 18 0 2 365 1363 5:15 PM 25 79 0 0 2 12 46 11 0 39 84 28 3 0 8 2 13 10 0 7 369 1423 5:30 PM 17 73 1 0 1 13 30 20 0 28 75 24 2 0 5 7 38 19 0 10 363 1442 5:45 PM 23 76 0 0 3 17 40 17 0 30 72 52 11 0 12 4 14 12 0 10 393 1490 6:00 PM 16 57 2 0 3 16 42 12 0 28 64 34 7 0 4 3 17 7 0 6 318 1443 6:15 PM 16 52 1 0 3 19 31 13 0 27 74 35 6 0 4 4 33 9 0 5 332 1406 6:30 PM 13 43 1 0 1 7 38 18 0 11 52 16 5 0 6 0 11 10 0 3 235 1278 6:45 PM 13 47 2 0 2 5 25 18 0 14 49 13 6 0 3 0 5 6 0 3 211 1096 Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUUR*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R*LeftLeft ThruThru RightRight UU R*R* All Vehicles 92 304 12 0 12 68 160 188 0 120 288 208 92 0 48 16 56 88 0 40 1792 Heavy Trucks 8 4 0 0 4 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 32 Buses Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 5/28/2025 7:15 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Page 4 of 4 394 Appendix C Level of Service Description 395 LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CONCEPT Level of service (LOS) is a concept developed to quantify the degree of comfort (including such elements as travel time, number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments caused by other vehicles) afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or roadway segment. Six grades are used to denote the various level of service from “A” to “F”.1 Signalized Intersections The six level-of-service grades are described qualitatively for signalized intersections in Appendix Table 1. Additionally, Appendix Table 2 identifies the relationship between level of service and average control delay per vehicle. Control delay is defined to include initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. Using this definition, Level of Service “D” is generally considered to represent the minimum acceptable design standard. Appendix Table 1. Level-of-Service Definitions (Signalized Intersections) Level of Service Average Delay per Vehicle A Very low average control delay, less than 10 seconds per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. B Average control delay is greater than 10 seconds per vehicle and less than or equal to 20 seconds per vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for a level of service A, causing higher levels of average delay. C Average control delay is greater than 20 seconds per vehicle and less than or equal to 35 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. D Average control delay is greater than 35 seconds per vehicle and less than or equal to 55 seconds per vehicle. The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. E Average control delay is greater than 55 seconds per vehicle and less than or equal to 80 seconds per vehicle. This is usually considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally (but not always) indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high volume/capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. F Average control delay is in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation. It may also occur at high volume/capacity ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also contribute to such high delay values. Most of the material in this Appendix is adapted from the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, (2016). 1 Most of the material in this Appendix is adapted from the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, (2016). 396 Appendix Table 2. Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level of Service Average Control Delay per Vehicle (Seconds) A <10.0 B >10 and (20 C >20 and (35 D >35 and (55 E >55 and (80 F >80 Unsignalized Intersections Unsignalized intersections include two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) and all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections. The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) provides models for estimating control delay at both TWSC and AWSC intersections. A qualitative description of the various service levels associated with an unsignalized intersection is presented in Appendix Table 3. A quantitative definition of level of service for unsignalized intersections is presented in Appendix Table 4. Using this definition, Level of Service “E” is generally considered to represent the minimum acceptable design standard. Appendix Table 3. Level-of-Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Delay per Vehicle to Minor Street A • Nearly all drivers find freedom of operation. • Very seldom is there more than one vehicle in queue. B • Some drivers begin to consider the delay an inconvenience. • Occasionally there is more than one vehicle in queue. C • Many times, there is more than one vehicle in queue. • Most drivers feel restricted, but not objectionably so. D • Often there is more than one vehicle in queue. • Drivers feel quite restricted. E • Represents a condition in which the demand is near or equal to the probable maximum number of vehicles that can be accommodated by the movement. • There is almost always more than one vehicle in queue. • Drivers find the delays approaching intolerable levels. F • Forced flow. • Represents an intersection failure condition that is caused by geometric and/or operational constraints external to the intersection. 397 Appendix Table 4. Level-of-Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections It should be noted that the level-of-service criteria for unsignalized intersections are somewhat different than the criteria used for signalized intersections. The primary reason for this difference is that drivers expect different levels of performance from different kinds of transportation facilities. The expectation is that a signalized intersection is designed to carry higher traffic volumes than an unsignalized intersection. Additionally, there are a number of driver behavior considerations that combine to make delays at signalized intersections less galling than at unsignalized intersections. For example, drivers at signalized intersections are able to relax during the red interval, while drivers on the minor street approaches to TWSC intersections must remain attentive to the task of identifying acceptable gaps and vehicle conflicts. Also, there is often much more variability in the amount of delay experienced by individual drivers at unsignalized intersections than signalized intersections. For these reasons, it is considered that the control delay threshold for any given level of service is less for an unsignalized intersection than for a signalized intersection. While overall intersection level of service is calculated for AWSC intersections, level of service is only calculated for the minor approaches and the major street left turn movements at TWSC intersections. No delay is assumed to the major street through movements. For TWSC intersections, the overall intersection level of service remains undefined: level of service is only calculated for each minor street lane. In the performance evaluation of TWSC intersections, it is important to consider other measures of effectiveness (MOEs) in addition to delay, such as v/c ratios for individual movements, average queue lengths, and 95th-percentile queue lengths. By focusing on a single MOE for the worst movement only, such as delay for the minor-street left turn, users may make inappropriate traffic control decisions. The potential for making such inappropriate decisions is likely to be particularly pronounced when the HCM level-of-service thresholds are adopted as legal standards, as is the case in many public agencies. Level of Service Average Control Delay per Vehicle (Seconds) A <10.0 B >10.0 and (15.0 C >15.0 and (25.0 D >25.0 and (35.0 E >35.0 and (50.0 F >50.0 398 Appendix D Existing Traffic Conditions Worksheets 399 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 96 2 21 53 0 95 Future Vol, veh/h 96 2 21 53 0 95 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 43 11 0 89 Mvmt Flow 101 2 22 56 0 100 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 104 0 204 103 Stage 1 - - - - 103 - Stage 2 - - - - 101 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.53 - 6.4 7.09 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.587 - 3.5 4.101 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1267 - 789 760 Stage 1 - - - - 926 - Stage 2 - - - - 928 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1266 - 774 759 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 774 - Stage 1 - - - - 925 - Stage 2 - - - - 911 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.2 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 759 - - 1266 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.132 - - 0.017 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - 400 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 270 384 127 74 94 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.75 0.07 0.28 0.35 Control Delay 11.4 49.1 3.8 33.1 6.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.4 49.1 3.8 33.1 6.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 212 6 33 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 40 297 12 71 24 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1256 651 1938 325 297 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.59 0.07 0.23 0.32 Intersection Summary 401 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 111 140 357 118 0 0 0 0 68 1 87 Future Volume (vph) 0 111 140 357 118 0 0 0 0 68 1 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3317 1736 2635 1736 1035 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3317 1736 2635 1736 1035 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 119 151 384 127 0 0 0 0 73 1 94 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 169 0 384 127 0 0 0 0 0 74 12 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 41% 45% 4% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 100% 56% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.3 23.6 56.0 9.8 9.8 Effective Green, g (s) 26.3 23.6 56.0 9.8 9.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.30 0.70 0.12 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1090 512 1844 212 126 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.22 0.05 c0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.75 0.07 0.35 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 19.0 25.5 3.8 32.2 31.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.59 0.83 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 6.4 0.1 1.4 0.4 Delay (s) 19.3 46.9 3.2 33.5 31.6 Level of Service B D A C C Approach Delay (s) 19.3 36.1 0.0 32.4 Approach LOS B D A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 30.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 402 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 112 428 103 71 97 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.05 0.26 0.14 0.39 0.26 Control Delay 9.4 7.7 13.0 1.7 32.1 1.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.4 7.7 13.3 1.7 32.1 1.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 19 15 46 0 28 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 40 29 122 6 66 1 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 491 2228 1647 762 340 535 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 663 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.14 0.05 0.43 0.14 0.21 0.18 Intersection Summary 403 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 69 110 0 0 419 101 56 3 106 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 69 110 0 0 419 101 56 3 106 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1172 3374 3406 1404 1141 1395 Flt Permitted 0.41 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 508 3374 3406 1404 1141 1395 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 70 112 0 0 428 103 57 3 108 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 9 82 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 112 0 0 428 48 0 62 15 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 54% 7% 0% 0% 6% 15% 55% 67% 10% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 52.8 52.8 37.0 37.0 12.3 12.3 Effective Green, g (s) 52.8 52.8 37.0 37.0 12.3 12.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.46 0.46 0.15 0.15 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 398 2226 1575 649 175 214 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.03 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.18 0.05 0.27 0.07 0.35 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 5.4 4.8 13.2 12.0 30.3 29.0 Progression Factor 1.49 1.44 0.89 1.60 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.2 2.6 0.3 Delay (s) 8.3 6.9 12.2 19.4 32.8 29.2 Level of Service A A B B C C Approach Delay (s) 7.4 13.6 30.8 0.0 Approach LOS A B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 15.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.28 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 404 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 77 144 13 90 40 58 69 3 82 213 383 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.16 0.08 0.25 0.10 0.38 0.11 0.00 0.44 0.35 0.50 Control Delay 34.9 9.8 34.7 34.2 0.5 41.2 20.8 0.0 41.2 22.8 5.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 34.9 9.8 34.7 34.2 0.5 41.2 20.8 0.0 41.2 22.8 5.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 7 6 21 0 27 25 0 38 82 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 80 21 23 44 0 64 55 0 82 141 59 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 260 905 162 373 396 154 635 738 190 613 765 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.16 0.08 0.24 0.10 0.38 0.11 0.00 0.43 0.35 0.50 Intersection Summary 405 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 75 75 66 13 88 39 57 68 3 80 209 375 Future Volume (vph) 75 75 66 13 88 39 57 68 3 80 209 375 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 3039 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3039 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 77 77 67 13 90 40 58 69 3 82 213 383 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 48 0 0 0 33 0 0 2 0 0 281 Lane Group Flow (vph) 77 96 0 13 90 7 58 69 1 82 213 102 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 4% 18% 0% 10% 0% 26% 10% 0% 4% 4% 6% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 22.6 1.4 14.4 14.4 8.5 22.3 22.3 7.1 21.4 21.4 Effective Green, g (s) 9.6 22.6 1.4 14.4 14.4 8.5 22.3 22.3 7.1 21.4 21.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.28 0.02 0.18 0.18 0.11 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 210 858 31 590 290 152 481 450 154 488 407 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.03 0.01 c0.03 0.04 0.04 c0.05 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.11 0.42 0.15 0.02 0.38 0.14 0.00 0.53 0.44 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 32.4 21.3 38.9 27.7 27.0 33.3 21.7 20.8 34.9 24.3 23.0 Progression Factor 0.94 0.71 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.5 0.1 18.0 0.3 0.1 2.2 0.6 0.0 4.5 2.8 1.5 Delay (s) 32.0 15.2 56.9 27.9 27.1 35.5 22.3 20.8 39.3 27.1 24.5 Level of Service C B E C C D C C D C C Approach Delay (s) 21.0 30.3 28.1 27.1 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 26.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 406 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 52 130 Average Queue (ft) 3 64 95th Queue (ft) 22 107 Link Distance (ft) 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 133 96 171 309 97 18 112 96 Average Queue (ft) 41 29 68 188 19 1 48 44 95th Queue (ft) 105 71 135 281 65 17 91 80 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 143 48 71 179 155 70 199 129 Average Queue (ft) 49 11 30 81 46 27 79 22 95th Queue (ft) 107 37 65 146 109 60 156 75 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 407 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Weekday AM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 124 78 102 42 91 88 49 112 94 14 112 162 Average Queue (ft) 50 23 40 12 35 30 21 43 28 1 46 73 95th Queue (ft) 103 58 82 36 75 73 47 94 70 6 91 134 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 427 427 427 945 980 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 144 Average Queue (ft) 57 95th Queue (ft) 106 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 408 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 91 1 3 90 1 88 Future Vol, veh/h 91 1 3 90 1 88 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 4 0 86 Mvmt Flow 101 1 3 100 1 98 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 103 0 210 103 Stage 1 - - - - 103 - Stage 2 - - - - 107 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 7.06 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 4.074 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1502 - 783 765 Stage 1 - - - - 926 - Stage 2 - - - - 922 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1501 - 780 764 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 780 - Stage 1 - - - - 925 - Stage 2 - - - - 919 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 764 - - 1501 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.129 - - 0.002 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.4 - - 7.4 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0 - 409 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 246 184 171 112 80 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.58 0.09 0.41 0.29 Control Delay 11.2 33.4 8.1 34.5 4.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.2 33.4 8.1 34.5 4.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 17 85 14 52 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 160 52 95 14 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1695 431 1985 469 384 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.43 0.09 0.24 0.21 Intersection Summary 410 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 154 83 177 164 0 0 0 0 107 1 77 Future Volume (vph) 0 154 83 177 164 0 0 0 0 107 1 77 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3642 1736 2735 1709 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3642 1736 2735 1709 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 160 86 184 171 0 0 0 0 111 1 80 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 197 0 184 171 0 0 0 0 0 112 11 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 29% 46% 4% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 52% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 34.5 14.6 55.2 10.6 10.6 Effective Green, g (s) 34.5 14.6 55.2 10.6 10.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.18 0.69 0.13 0.13 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1570 316 1887 226 140 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.11 0.06 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.58 0.09 0.50 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 13.7 29.9 4.1 32.2 30.4 Progression Factor 1.00 0.88 1.63 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.2 0.1 2.3 0.3 Delay (s) 13.8 29.6 6.8 34.5 30.7 Level of Service B C A C C Approach Delay (s) 13.8 18.6 0.0 33.0 Approach LOS B B A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 411 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 169 261 103 127 312 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.08 0.18 0.14 0.49 0.58 Control Delay 12.4 10.3 11.3 0.8 27.9 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Delay 12.4 10.3 11.3 0.8 28.0 7.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 28 24 22 0 47 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 52 40 65 0 89 58 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 471 2168 1484 720 446 728 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 17 0 0 40 50 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.08 0.18 0.14 0.31 0.46 Intersection Summary 412 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 97 164 0 0 253 100 88 1 337 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 97 164 0 0 253 100 88 1 337 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1228 3505 3438 1455 1215 1490 Flt Permitted 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 611 3505 3438 1455 1215 1490 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 100 169 0 0 261 103 91 1 347 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 61 0 21 251 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 169 0 0 261 42 0 106 61 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 47% 3% 0% 0% 5% 11% 50% 100% 3% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 49.5 49.5 32.9 32.9 15.6 15.6 Effective Green, g (s) 49.5 49.5 32.9 32.9 15.6 15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.41 0.41 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 442 2168 1413 598 236 290 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.05 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.03 0.09 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.08 0.18 0.07 0.45 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 6.8 6.1 15.0 14.3 28.4 27.0 Progression Factor 1.41 1.41 0.63 0.28 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 2.8 0.8 Delay (s) 10.0 8.7 9.7 4.2 31.2 27.8 Level of Service A A A A C C Approach Delay (s) 9.2 8.1 28.8 0.0 Approach LOS A A C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 413 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 335 193 15 86 93 86 329 11 47 175 199 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.15 0.08 0.21 0.19 0.42 0.55 0.01 0.25 0.43 0.33 Control Delay 57.9 9.8 33.8 32.6 0.8 38.2 31.5 0.0 36.2 32.2 1.4 Queue Delay 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 80.4 9.8 33.8 32.6 0.8 38.2 31.5 0.0 36.2 32.2 1.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 155 4 7 21 0 40 153 0 22 76 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #303 34 25 40 0 82 #300 0 54 143 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 370 1329 185 502 535 233 596 740 195 406 608 Starvation Cap Reductn 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.02 0.15 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.37 0.55 0.01 0.24 0.43 0.33 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 414 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 318 125 58 14 82 88 82 313 10 45 166 189 Future Volume (vph) 318 125 58 14 82 88 82 313 10 45 166 189 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 3415 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3415 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 335 132 61 15 86 93 86 329 11 47 175 199 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 38 0 0 0 76 0 0 9 0 0 169 Lane Group Flow (vph) 335 155 0 15 86 17 86 329 2 47 175 30 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.9 30.2 1.6 14.9 14.9 10.2 16.3 16.3 5.3 11.9 11.9 Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 30.2 1.6 14.9 14.9 10.2 16.3 16.3 5.3 11.9 11.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.38 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.07 0.15 0.15 Clearance Time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 370 1289 36 634 300 207 387 329 119 279 235 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 c0.05 0.01 0.03 c0.05 c0.17 0.03 0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.12 0.42 0.14 0.06 0.42 0.85 0.01 0.39 0.63 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 30.8 16.2 38.7 27.2 26.8 32.2 30.7 25.4 35.8 32.0 29.5 Progression Factor 0.92 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 24.1 0.1 15.5 0.2 0.2 1.8 20.3 0.0 2.9 10.2 1.1 Delay (s) 52.4 12.7 54.3 27.4 26.9 34.0 51.0 25.4 38.7 42.2 30.6 Level of Service D B D C C C D C D D C Approach Delay (s) 37.9 29.2 46.9 36.3 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 38.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 26.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 415 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB B14 NB Directions Served L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 8 4 116 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 60 95th Queue (ft) 5 5 100 Link Distance (ft) 226 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 131 73 119 201 142 34 145 90 Average Queue (ft) 43 29 47 102 45 1 63 37 95th Queue (ft) 104 64 100 171 110 21 115 75 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 136 64 96 123 111 86 334 288 Average Queue (ft) 56 18 47 47 44 31 160 96 95th Queue (ft) 114 50 84 95 90 67 291 245 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 416 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Weekday PM - 2025 Existing VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 225 198 145 49 70 103 84 149 270 21 84 158 Average Queue (ft) 169 67 41 13 26 37 40 67 128 4 33 68 95th Queue (ft) 244 167 105 39 59 82 72 137 228 16 69 127 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 427 427 427 945 980 Upstream Blk Time (%) 11 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 19 2 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 6 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 5 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 74 Average Queue (ft) 33 95th Queue (ft) 60 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 28 417 Appendix E Existing Traffic Conditions Worksheets - Mitigation 418 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 96 2 21 53 0 95 Future Vol, veh/h 96 2 21 53 0 95 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 43 11 0 89 Mvmt Flow 101 2 22 56 0 100 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 104 0 204 103 Stage 1 - - - - 103 - Stage 2 - - - - 101 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.53 - 6.4 7.09 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.587 - 3.5 4.101 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1267 - 789 760 Stage 1 - - - - 926 - Stage 2 - - - - 928 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1266 - 774 759 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 774 - Stage 1 - - - - 925 - Stage 2 - - - - 911 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.2 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 759 - - 1266 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.132 - - 0.017 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - 419 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 270 384 127 74 94 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.75 0.07 0.28 0.36 Control Delay 11.3 41.0 5.8 33.6 7.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.3 41.0 5.8 33.6 7.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 210 6 33 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 295 36 72 25 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1259 670 1945 260 263 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.57 0.07 0.28 0.36 Intersection Summary 420 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 111 140 357 118 0 0 0 0 68 1 87 Future Volume (vph) 0 111 140 357 118 0 0 0 0 68 1 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3317 1736 2635 1736 1035 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3317 1736 2635 1736 1035 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 119 151 384 127 0 0 0 0 73 1 94 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 169 0 384 127 0 0 0 0 0 74 11 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 41% 45% 4% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 100% 56% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.4 23.7 56.2 9.6 9.6 Effective Green, g (s) 26.4 23.7 56.2 9.6 9.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.30 0.70 0.12 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1094 514 1851 208 124 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.22 0.05 c0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.75 0.07 0.36 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 18.9 25.4 3.7 32.4 31.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.28 1.32 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 6.1 0.1 1.4 0.4 Delay (s) 19.2 38.6 5.0 33.8 31.8 Level of Service B D A C C Approach Delay (s) 19.2 30.3 0.0 32.6 Approach LOS B C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 421 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 112 428 103 71 97 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.05 0.26 0.13 0.39 0.26 Control Delay 12.1 10.3 14.0 2.1 32.2 1.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.1 10.3 14.2 2.1 32.2 1.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 19 15 70 0 28 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 38 27 95 0 66 1 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 450 2229 1649 763 255 445 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 602 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.05 0.41 0.13 0.28 0.22 Intersection Summary 422 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 69 110 0 0 419 101 56 3 106 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 69 110 0 0 419 101 56 3 106 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1172 3374 3406 1404 1141 1395 Flt Permitted 0.41 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 508 3374 3406 1404 1141 1395 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 70 112 0 0 428 103 57 3 108 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 9 82 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 70 112 0 0 428 48 0 62 15 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 54% 7% 0% 0% 6% 15% 55% 67% 10% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 52.9 52.9 37.1 37.1 12.2 12.2 Effective Green, g (s) 52.9 52.9 37.1 37.1 12.2 12.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.46 0.46 0.15 0.15 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 398 2231 1579 651 174 212 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.03 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.18 0.05 0.27 0.07 0.35 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 5.4 4.7 13.2 11.9 30.4 29.0 Progression Factor 1.96 1.94 0.96 2.08 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.2 2.6 0.3 Delay (s) 10.8 9.3 13.0 24.9 33.0 29.3 Level of Service B A B C C C Approach Delay (s) 9.9 15.3 30.9 0.0 Approach LOS A B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.28 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 423 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 69 152 13 90 40 58 69 3 82 213 383 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.38 0.07 0.25 0.11 0.36 0.10 0.00 0.40 0.33 0.48 Control Delay 36.0 14.3 32.9 34.7 0.6 39.7 19.8 0.0 38.3 21.1 4.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 36.0 14.3 32.9 34.7 0.6 39.7 19.8 0.0 38.3 21.1 4.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 9 6 22 0 27 24 0 38 78 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 79 27 22 44 0 63 54 0 80 136 57 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 209 441 198 361 375 168 663 748 227 652 790 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.33 0.34 0.07 0.25 0.11 0.35 0.10 0.00 0.36 0.33 0.48 Intersection Summary 424 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 75 75 66 13 88 39 57 68 3 80 209 375 Future Volume (vph) 75 75 66 13 88 39 57 68 3 80 209 375 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1595 2925 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1595 2925 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 77 77 67 13 90 40 58 69 3 82 213 383 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 59 0 0 0 36 0 0 2 0 0 246 Lane Group Flow (vph) 69 93 0 13 90 4 58 69 1 82 213 137 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 4% 18% 0% 10% 0% 26% 10% 0% 4% 4% 6% Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.4 9.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.9 29.1 29.1 7.9 28.6 28.6 Effective Green, g (s) 9.4 9.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.9 29.1 29.1 7.9 28.6 28.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.36 0.36 0.10 0.36 0.36 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 187 343 194 352 173 159 628 587 171 653 544 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.03 0.01 c0.03 0.04 0.04 c0.05 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.27 0.07 0.26 0.02 0.36 0.11 0.00 0.48 0.33 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 32.6 32.2 32.1 32.8 31.9 32.9 16.9 16.2 34.1 18.7 18.1 Progression Factor 0.94 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.6 0.3 0.8 0.1 1.9 0.4 0.0 2.9 1.3 1.1 Delay (s) 32.2 20.4 32.4 33.6 32.1 34.9 17.2 16.2 37.0 20.0 19.3 Level of Service C C C C C C B B D C B Approach Delay (s) 24.1 33.0 25.1 21.6 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 25.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 425 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement EB WB NB Directions Served TR L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 2 49 127 Average Queue (ft) 0 4 63 95th Queue (ft) 3 25 105 Link Distance (ft) 1397 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 135 84 154 310 118 28 113 102 Average Queue (ft) 45 29 64 191 24 1 47 45 95th Queue (ft) 108 69 125 279 81 16 92 83 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 141 48 76 171 144 74 210 157 Average Queue (ft) 49 13 28 81 46 28 84 24 95th Queue (ft) 106 39 67 146 104 63 163 89 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 426 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L LT TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 113 89 98 34 89 87 47 128 99 11 117 168 Average Queue (ft) 42 36 43 8 33 28 21 45 27 1 46 72 95th Queue (ft) 87 74 84 26 72 68 46 101 70 5 90 134 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 415 415 415 945 977 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 141 Average Queue (ft) 55 95th Queue (ft) 104 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1 427 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 91 1 3 90 1 88 Future Vol, veh/h 91 1 3 90 1 88 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 4 0 86 Mvmt Flow 101 1 3 100 1 98 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 103 0 210 103 Stage 1 - - - - 103 - Stage 2 - - - - 107 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 7.06 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 4.074 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1502 - 783 765 Stage 1 - - - - 926 - Stage 2 - - - - 922 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1501 - 780 764 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 780 - Stage 1 - - - - 925 - Stage 2 - - - - 919 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 764 - - 1501 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.129 - - 0.002 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.4 - - 7.4 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0 - 428 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 246 184 171 112 80 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.58 0.09 0.41 0.29 Control Delay 11.2 37.0 6.7 34.5 4.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.2 37.0 6.7 34.5 4.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 17 88 8 52 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 161 44 95 14 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1694 496 1987 363 325 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.37 0.09 0.31 0.25 Intersection Summary 429 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 154 83 177 164 0 0 0 0 107 1 77 Future Volume (vph) 0 154 83 177 164 0 0 0 0 107 1 77 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3642 1736 2735 1709 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3642 1736 2735 1709 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 160 86 184 171 0 0 0 0 111 1 80 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 197 0 184 171 0 0 0 0 0 112 11 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 29% 46% 4% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 52% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 34.6 14.6 55.3 10.5 10.5 Effective Green, g (s) 34.6 14.6 55.3 10.5 10.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.43 0.18 0.69 0.13 0.13 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1575 316 1890 224 139 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.11 0.06 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.13 0.58 0.09 0.50 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 13.6 29.9 4.1 32.3 30.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.01 1.35 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.2 0.1 2.4 0.3 Delay (s) 13.8 33.4 5.6 34.7 30.8 Level of Service B C A C C Approach Delay (s) 13.8 20.0 0.0 33.1 Approach LOS B C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 430 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 169 261 103 127 312 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.08 0.18 0.14 0.50 0.58 Control Delay 12.2 10.0 17.9 1.7 28.0 7.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.2 10.0 17.9 1.7 28.0 7.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 28 24 42 0 47 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 53 41 87 12 89 58 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 477 2170 1486 720 416 699 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.08 0.18 0.14 0.31 0.45 Intersection Summary 431 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 97 164 0 0 253 100 88 1 337 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 97 164 0 0 253 100 88 1 337 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1228 3505 3438 1455 1215 1490 Flt Permitted 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 611 3505 3438 1455 1215 1490 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 100 169 0 0 261 103 91 1 347 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 61 0 21 251 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 169 0 0 261 42 0 106 61 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 47% 3% 0% 0% 5% 11% 50% 100% 3% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 49.5 49.5 32.9 32.9 15.6 15.6 Effective Green, g (s) 49.5 49.5 32.9 32.9 15.6 15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.41 0.41 0.19 0.19 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 442 2168 1413 598 236 290 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.05 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.03 0.09 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.08 0.18 0.07 0.45 0.21 Uniform Delay, d1 6.8 6.1 15.0 14.3 28.4 27.0 Progression Factor 1.38 1.37 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 2.8 0.8 Delay (s) 9.8 8.5 15.3 14.5 31.2 27.8 Level of Service A A B B C C Approach Delay (s) 8.9 15.1 28.8 0.0 Approach LOS A B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 19.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 432 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 178 350 15 86 93 86 329 11 47 175 199 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.58 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.45 0.43 0.01 0.26 0.31 0.31 Control Delay 40.3 31.9 35.0 36.5 1.7 41.3 23.5 0.0 38.3 25.0 4.5 Queue Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.5 31.9 35.0 36.5 1.7 41.3 23.5 0.0 38.3 25.0 4.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 91 82 7 22 0 41 143 0 23 71 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 159 124 25 44 0 85 229 0 55 127 41 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 336 703 176 332 364 207 757 773 178 573 632 Starvation Cap Reductn 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.55 0.50 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.42 0.43 0.01 0.26 0.31 0.31 Intersection Summary 433 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 318 125 58 14 82 88 82 313 10 45 166 189 Future Volume (vph) 318 125 58 14 82 88 82 313 10 45 166 189 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1595 3238 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1595 3238 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 335 132 61 15 86 93 86 329 11 47 175 199 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 21 0 0 0 84 0 0 7 0 0 138 Lane Group Flow (vph) 178 329 0 15 86 9 86 329 4 47 175 61 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 14.8 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.7 29.3 29.3 4.9 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 14.8 14.8 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.7 29.3 29.3 4.9 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.36 0.36 0.06 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 287 584 176 332 157 192 678 577 107 573 482 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.10 0.01 c0.03 c0.05 c0.17 0.03 0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.56 0.09 0.26 0.06 0.45 0.49 0.01 0.44 0.31 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 31.0 30.6 33.7 34.3 33.6 33.7 20.5 17.0 37.2 21.8 20.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.7 1.5 0.4 0.9 0.3 2.3 2.5 0.0 3.9 1.4 0.5 Delay (s) 35.7 32.2 34.1 35.1 33.9 35.9 23.0 17.0 41.1 23.2 21.1 Level of Service D C C D C D C B D C C Approach Delay (s) 33.3 34.5 25.4 24.2 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 82.0 Sum of lost time (s) 25.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 434 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement EB WB B14 NB Directions Served TR L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 2 10 6 115 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 0 60 95th Queue (ft) 3 6 8 98 Link Distance (ft) 1397 226 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 126 80 113 211 111 16 148 88 Average Queue (ft) 47 30 44 102 28 1 69 39 95th Queue (ft) 105 65 91 171 81 11 123 76 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 147 69 100 126 124 78 292 245 Average Queue (ft) 55 16 48 57 51 34 140 68 95th Queue (ft) 115 48 87 107 100 69 248 182 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 435 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2025 Existing - Mitigation Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L LT TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 188 161 136 36 74 104 67 148 258 21 78 136 Average Queue (ft) 105 96 71 8 23 37 34 64 111 3 29 62 95th Queue (ft) 160 146 123 26 57 84 59 131 203 14 64 116 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 415 415 415 945 977 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 3 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 74 Average Queue (ft) 27 95th Queue (ft) 54 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 4 436 Appendix F In-Process Development Trips 437 Virginia Technology Park - In-Process TripsITE Trip Gen 11th EdArogas ParcelTotal In Out Total In OutStrip Retail Plaza822 22.570 1,000 S.F. 1,182 53 32 21 149 75 74(473) (22) (11) (11) (60) (30) (30)709 31 21 10 89 45 44 Parcel 33-A-12Total In Out Total In OutLight Industrial110 150.000 1,000 S.F. 731 111 98 13 98 14 84731 111 98 13 98 14 84Parcel 33-9-4Total In Out Total In OutWarehousing150 8.810 1,000 S.F. 52 1 1 0 2 1 152 1 1 0 2 1 1Whitehall Commerce Center (Undeveloped Portion)Total In Out Total In OutLight Industrial110 162.000 1,000 S.F. 789 120 106 14 105 15 90789 120 106 14 105 15 90Peak Hour Adjacent StreetWeekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Net New TripsLand UseITE CodeUnitsWeekday DailyNet New TripsPass-bys (40% AM/PM)Net New TripsLand UseITE CodeUnitsNet New TripsLand UseITE CodeUnitsLand UsePeak Hour Adjacent StreetWeekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday DailyPeak Hour Adjacent StreetWeekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday DailyPeak Hour Adjacent StreetWeekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour ITE CodeUnitsWeekday Daily438 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: F1Net New Site-Generated Trips Arogas Parcel Frederick County, VA F1 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 71 4 78 4 4 315 1 8 - ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION* *TO MATCH ASSUMPTIONS IN 2017 WHITEHALL COMMERCE CENTER TIA AROGAS PARCEL 1 71 4 78 4 4 315 1 8 439 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: F2Pass-by Trips Arogas Parcel Frederick County, VA F2 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM44 44 4 4 8 1 8 - ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION* *TO MATCH ASSUMPTIONS IN 2017 WHITEHALL COMMERCE CENTER TIA AROGAS PARCEL 1111 1111 11 11 22 3 22 NO PASS-BY TRIPS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO PASS-BY TRIPS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION -1-3440 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: F3Net-New Site-Generated Trips Parcel 33-A-12 Frederick County, VA F3 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM- ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION* *TO MATCH ASSUMPTIONS IN 2017 WHITEHALL COMMERCE CENTER TIA PARCEL 33-A-12 5 1 345 5 1 3439 6 5 1111073 1 4 51 29 4 56 33 29 629111 441 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: F4Net-New Site-Generated Trips Parcel 33-9-4 Frederick County, VA F4 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM- ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION PARCEL 33-9-4 1 121 1 1 NO TRIPS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO TRIPS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION NO TRIPS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS INTERSECTION 442 SITE C:\Users\abutsick\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_33008\31757_ReportFigs.dwg Jun 06, 2025 - 4:02pm - abutsick Layout Tab: F5Net-New Site-Generated Trips Whitehall Commerce Center (Undeveloped Portions) Frederick County, VA F5 Virginia Technology Park June 2025 FigureWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AMWEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM1 2 3 4 N 669 REST C H U R C H R D MACBE T H L N 670 81 11 MARTINSBURG PKWOOD B I N E R D 321 ZACHARY ANN LNSTAYMAN DRRUEBUCK RD 4 VI R G I N I AWE S T V I R G I N I A WEEKDAY PMWEEKDAY AM- ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION* *TO MATCH ASSUMPTIONS IN 2017 WHITEHALL COMMERCE CENTER TIA WHITEHALL COMMERCE CENTER 5 1 375 5 1 3742 6 5 51179 11 1 1 4 51 32 4 56 36 32 1211 68 9 443 Appendix G 2031 Background Traffic Conditions Worksheets 444 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 113 2 23 58 0 101 Future Vol, veh/h 113 2 23 58 0 101 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 43 11 0 89 Mvmt Flow 119 2 24 61 0 106 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 121 0 229 120 Stage 1 - - - - 120 - Stage 2 - - - - 109 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.53 - 6.4 7.09 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.587 - 3.5 4.101 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1248 - 764 742 Stage 1 - - - - 910 - Stage 2 - - - - 921 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1248 - 749 742 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 749 - Stage 1 - - - - 910 - Stage 2 - - - - 904 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.3 10.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 742 - - 1248 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.143 - - 0.019 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.7 - - 7.9 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - 445 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 299 427 137 167 100 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.79 0.08 0.57 0.36 Control Delay 13.2 52.4 4.9 38.3 7.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.2 52.4 4.9 38.3 7.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 19 235 8 77 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 46 326 14 136 27 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1004 648 1721 327 297 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.66 0.08 0.51 0.34 Intersection Summary 446 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 129 149 397 127 0 0 0 0 154 1 93 Future Volume (vph) 0 129 149 397 127 0 0 0 0 154 1 93 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3333 1736 2635 1747 1035 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3333 1736 2635 1747 1035 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 139 160 427 137 0 0 0 0 166 1 100 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 117 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 182 0 427 137 0 0 0 0 0 167 17 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 41% 45% 4% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 100% 56% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.3 24.9 52.3 13.5 13.5 Effective Green, g (s) 21.3 24.9 52.3 13.5 13.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.31 0.65 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 887 540 1722 294 174 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.25 0.05 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.79 0.08 0.57 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 22.8 25.2 5.1 30.6 28.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.67 0.89 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 8.0 0.1 3.0 0.3 Delay (s) 23.3 50.0 4.6 33.6 28.4 Level of Service C D A C C Approach Delay (s) 23.3 39.0 0.0 31.7 Approach LOS C D A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 447 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 214 474 128 83 179 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.10 0.29 0.17 0.42 0.48 Control Delay 10.7 9.3 12.8 2.3 29.6 9.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.7 9.3 13.2 2.3 29.6 9.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 26 38 48 0 30 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m52 62 137 7 69 49 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 479 2213 1628 755 352 535 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 623 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.10 0.47 0.17 0.24 0.33 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 448 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 73 210 0 0 465 125 59 3 195 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 73 210 0 0 465 125 59 3 195 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1172 3374 3406 1404 1161 1395 Flt Permitted 0.39 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 484 3374 3406 1404 1161 1395 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 214 0 0 474 128 60 3 199 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 69 0 17 151 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 214 0 0 474 59 0 66 28 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 54% 7% 0% 0% 6% 15% 55% 67% 10% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 52.5 52.5 36.6 36.6 12.6 12.6 Effective Green, g (s) 52.5 52.5 36.6 36.6 12.6 12.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.46 0.46 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 383 2214 1558 642 182 219 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.06 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.10 0.30 0.09 0.36 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 5.5 5.0 13.7 12.3 30.1 29.0 Progression Factor 1.61 1.65 0.83 0.98 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.3 2.6 0.6 Delay (s) 9.2 8.4 11.8 12.2 32.7 29.5 Level of Service A A B B C C Approach Delay (s) 8.6 11.9 30.5 0.0 Approach LOS A B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 15.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 449 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 308 16 122 43 73 78 8 98 236 406 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.31 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.49 0.12 0.01 0.53 0.39 0.53 Control Delay 34.1 6.9 35.0 35.5 0.6 45.6 21.1 0.0 45.0 23.8 5.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 34.1 6.9 35.0 35.5 0.6 45.6 21.1 0.0 45.0 23.8 5.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 49 11 8 30 0 35 28 0 47 93 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 107 38 26 56 0 76 60 0 #96 156 61 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 260 983 162 372 396 151 624 730 187 600 773 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.40 0.31 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.48 0.13 0.01 0.52 0.39 0.53 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 450 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 103 159 143 16 120 42 72 76 8 96 231 398 Future Volume (vph) 103 159 143 16 120 42 72 76 8 96 231 398 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 3031 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3031 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 105 162 146 16 122 43 73 78 8 98 236 406 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 104 0 0 0 35 0 0 6 0 0 300 Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 204 0 16 122 8 73 78 2 98 236 106 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 4% 18% 0% 10% 0% 26% 10% 0% 4% 4% 6% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.3 23.2 1.4 14.3 14.3 8.4 21.9 21.9 6.9 20.9 20.9 Effective Green, g (s) 10.3 23.2 1.4 14.3 14.3 8.4 21.9 21.9 6.9 20.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.29 0.02 0.18 0.18 0.11 0.27 0.27 0.09 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 225 878 31 586 288 150 472 442 149 477 398 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 c0.07 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.05 c0.06 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.23 0.52 0.21 0.03 0.49 0.17 0.00 0.66 0.49 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 32.3 21.6 39.0 28.0 27.1 33.8 22.1 21.1 35.4 25.1 23.5 Progression Factor 0.86 0.49 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 0.2 26.0 0.4 0.1 3.4 0.8 0.0 11.0 3.6 1.6 Delay (s) 29.8 10.8 65.0 28.4 27.2 37.1 22.9 21.1 46.5 28.7 25.1 Level of Service C B E C C D C C D C C Approach Delay (s) 15.6 31.3 29.3 29.1 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 26.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 451 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Background Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 45 129 Average Queue (ft) 3 64 95th Queue (ft) 23 104 Link Distance (ft) 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 132 100 198 356 115 13 186 110 Average Queue (ft) 47 38 83 218 34 0 91 43 95th Queue (ft) 112 82 157 319 90 10 162 84 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 154 77 126 199 181 74 241 177 Average Queue (ft) 57 23 57 99 57 32 95 41 95th Queue (ft) 124 59 103 172 132 62 184 113 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 452 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Background Weekday AM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 182 133 154 53 116 111 53 138 145 18 121 178 Average Queue (ft) 75 42 63 15 50 41 24 59 35 2 57 86 95th Queue (ft) 145 93 121 43 95 91 50 119 92 12 105 150 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 427 427 427 945 980 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 145 Average Queue (ft) 65 95th Queue (ft) 112 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2 453 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 101 1 3 106 1 95 Future Vol, veh/h 101 1 3 106 1 95 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 4 0 86 Mvmt Flow 112 1 3 118 1 106 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 113 0 237 113 Stage 1 - - - - 113 - Stage 2 - - - - 124 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 7.06 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 4.074 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1489 - 756 754 Stage 1 - - - - 917 - Stage 2 - - - - 907 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1489 - 754 754 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 754 - Stage 1 - - - - 917 - Stage 2 - - - - 905 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 754 - - 1489 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.141 - - 0.002 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.4 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0 - 454 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 268 286 192 158 85 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.71 0.11 0.51 0.29 Control Delay 14.5 40.2 16.0 35.1 4.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.5 40.2 16.0 35.1 4.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 156 27 73 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 48 233 84 120 16 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1281 450 1754 469 384 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.64 0.11 0.34 0.22 Intersection Summary 455 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 168 89 275 184 0 0 0 0 151 1 82 Future Volume (vph) 0 168 89 275 184 0 0 0 0 151 1 82 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3645 1736 2735 1708 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3645 1736 2735 1708 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 175 93 286 192 0 0 0 0 157 1 85 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 206 0 286 192 0 0 0 0 0 158 15 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 29% 46% 4% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 52% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.7 18.5 51.3 14.5 14.5 Effective Green, g (s) 26.7 18.5 51.3 14.5 14.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.23 0.64 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1216 401 1753 309 192 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 c0.16 0.07 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.71 0.11 0.51 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 18.8 28.3 5.5 29.6 27.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.08 2.60 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 6.2 0.1 1.9 0.2 Delay (s) 19.1 36.6 14.5 31.5 27.5 Level of Service B D B C C Approach Delay (s) 19.1 27.7 0.0 30.1 Approach LOS B C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 456 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 107 222 377 199 138 366 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.10 0.26 0.28 0.50 0.61 Control Delay 14.4 11.7 12.5 2.1 26.6 7.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 Total Delay 14.4 11.7 12.7 2.3 26.8 7.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 33 36 32 0 50 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 62 55 65 m0 92 61 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 432 2118 1423 719 450 763 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 326 148 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 70 0 0 72 91 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.11 0.34 0.35 0.37 0.54 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 457 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 104 215 0 0 366 193 93 1 395 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 104 215 0 0 366 193 93 1 395 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1228 3505 3438 1455 1222 1490 Flt Permitted 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 542 3505 3438 1455 1222 1490 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 107 222 0 0 377 199 96 1 407 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 121 0 23 290 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 107 222 0 0 377 78 0 115 76 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 47% 3% 0% 0% 5% 11% 50% 100% 3% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 48.4 48.4 31.5 31.5 16.7 16.7 Effective Green, g (s) 48.4 48.4 31.5 31.5 16.7 16.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.39 0.39 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 402 2120 1353 572 255 311 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.06 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.05 0.09 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.10 0.28 0.14 0.45 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 7.3 6.7 16.5 15.5 27.6 26.4 Progression Factor 1.48 1.47 0.63 0.30 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.4 2.6 0.9 Delay (s) 11.4 9.9 10.9 5.1 30.3 27.3 Level of Service B A B A C C Approach Delay (s) 10.4 8.9 28.1 0.0 Approach LOS B A C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 458 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 229 24 220 107 157 364 13 53 183 212 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.18 0.15 0.65 0.23 0.73 0.64 0.02 0.29 0.51 0.37 Control Delay 60.9 10.6 36.3 44.3 1.1 54.0 34.0 0.1 38.1 34.9 1.8 Queue Delay 43.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 104.5 10.6 36.3 44.3 1.1 54.0 34.0 0.1 38.1 34.9 1.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 208 6 11 56 0 76 177 0 25 83 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #370 28 34 #94 0 #163 #328 0 59 146 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 435 1291 157 340 475 223 572 723 180 360 578 Starvation Cap Reductn 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.19 0.18 0.15 0.65 0.23 0.70 0.64 0.02 0.29 0.51 0.37 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 459 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 393 144 73 23 209 102 149 346 12 50 174 201 Future Volume (vph) 393 144 73 23 209 102 149 346 12 50 174 201 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 3405 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3405 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 414 152 77 24 220 107 157 364 13 53 183 212 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 49 0 0 0 91 0 0 10 0 0 182 Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 180 0 24 220 16 157 364 3 53 183 30 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.9 29.2 2.8 12.1 12.1 10.7 16.6 16.6 4.8 11.2 11.2 Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 29.2 2.8 12.1 12.1 10.7 16.6 16.6 4.8 11.2 11.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.36 0.03 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.14 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 435 1242 63 515 244 217 394 335 108 263 221 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.05 0.01 c0.06 c0.10 c0.19 0.03 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.15 0.38 0.43 0.07 0.72 0.92 0.01 0.49 0.70 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 29.6 17.0 37.8 30.8 29.1 33.2 31.1 25.2 36.4 32.8 30.2 Progression Factor 0.92 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 29.6 0.1 7.9 1.2 0.2 12.0 29.7 0.0 4.7 14.2 1.3 Delay (s) 56.8 13.4 45.6 32.0 29.3 45.3 60.8 25.2 41.1 47.0 31.4 Level of Service E B D C C D E C D D C Approach Delay (s) 41.3 32.1 55.3 38.9 Approach LOS D C E D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 42.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 26.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 460 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Background Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement EB WB NB Directions Served TR L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 6 8 127 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 62 95th Queue (ft) 8 4 102 Link Distance (ft) 1397 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 137 88 124 312 199 63 176 100 Average Queue (ft) 52 38 56 158 73 3 88 39 95th Queue (ft) 118 74 105 267 158 27 152 78 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 180 92 118 149 140 112 473 381 Average Queue (ft) 72 27 62 70 59 51 262 192 95th Queue (ft) 140 69 101 124 113 92 502 418 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) 5 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 1 461 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Background Weekday PM - 2031 Background VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 237 215 206 68 129 169 102 150 399 73 87 158 Average Queue (ft) 194 117 79 20 61 85 44 107 176 7 34 76 95th Queue (ft) 252 236 199 53 109 148 81 175 327 53 71 138 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 427 427 427 945 980 Upstream Blk Time (%) 25 5 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 51 11 6 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 4 11 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 15 18 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 93 Average Queue (ft) 39 95th Queue (ft) 73 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 111 462 Appendix H 2031 Background Traffic Conditions Worksheets - Mitigation 463 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 113 2 23 58 0 101 Future Vol, veh/h 113 2 23 58 0 101 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 43 11 0 89 Mvmt Flow 119 2 24 61 0 106 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 121 0 229 120 Stage 1 - - - - 120 - Stage 2 - - - - 109 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.53 - 6.4 7.09 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.587 - 3.5 4.101 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1248 - 764 742 Stage 1 - - - - 910 - Stage 2 - - - - 921 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1248 - 749 742 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 749 - Stage 1 - - - - 910 - Stage 2 - - - - 904 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.3 10.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 742 - - 1248 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.143 - - 0.019 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.7 - - 7.9 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - 464 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 299 427 137 167 100 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.79 0.08 0.57 0.36 Control Delay 13.3 43.9 10.6 38.3 7.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.3 43.9 10.6 38.3 7.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 19 233 8 77 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 46 324 58 136 27 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 997 664 1721 327 297 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.64 0.08 0.51 0.34 Intersection Summary 465 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 129 149 397 127 0 0 0 0 154 1 93 Future Volume (vph) 0 129 149 397 127 0 0 0 0 154 1 93 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3333 1736 2635 1747 1035 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3333 1736 2635 1747 1035 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 139 160 427 137 0 0 0 0 166 1 100 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 181 0 427 137 0 0 0 0 0 167 17 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 41% 45% 4% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 100% 56% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.2 25.0 52.3 13.5 13.5 Effective Green, g (s) 21.2 25.0 52.3 13.5 13.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.31 0.65 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 883 542 1722 294 174 v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 c0.25 0.05 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.79 0.08 0.57 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 22.9 25.1 5.1 30.6 28.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.36 1.95 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 7.7 0.1 3.0 0.3 Delay (s) 23.4 41.7 10.0 33.6 28.4 Level of Service C D A C C Approach Delay (s) 23.4 34.0 0.0 31.7 Approach LOS C C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 30.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 466 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 214 474 128 83 179 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.10 0.29 0.17 0.42 0.48 Control Delay 16.5 15.2 15.1 3.6 29.9 9.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.5 15.2 15.4 3.6 29.9 9.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 26 38 80 0 30 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m50 60 121 0 69 49 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 427 2212 1627 755 280 460 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 580 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.17 0.10 0.45 0.17 0.30 0.39 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 467 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 73 210 0 0 465 125 59 3 195 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 73 210 0 0 465 125 59 3 195 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1172 3374 3406 1404 1161 1395 Flt Permitted 0.39 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 484 3374 3406 1404 1161 1395 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 214 0 0 474 128 60 3 199 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 69 0 16 151 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 214 0 0 474 59 0 67 28 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 54% 7% 0% 0% 6% 15% 55% 67% 10% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 52.5 52.5 36.6 36.6 12.6 12.6 Effective Green, g (s) 52.5 52.5 36.6 36.6 12.6 12.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.66 0.66 0.46 0.46 0.16 0.16 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 383 2214 1558 642 182 219 v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 0.06 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.19 0.10 0.30 0.09 0.37 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 5.5 5.0 13.7 12.3 30.1 29.0 Progression Factor 2.58 2.70 0.99 1.67 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.3 2.6 0.6 Delay (s) 14.6 13.7 13.9 20.8 32.8 29.5 Level of Service B B B C C C Approach Delay (s) 13.9 15.4 30.6 0.0 Approach LOS B B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 18.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 468 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 94 319 16 122 43 73 78 8 98 236 406 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.62 0.09 0.37 0.12 0.42 0.12 0.01 0.47 0.38 0.52 Control Delay 33.5 17.2 34.1 37.2 0.7 40.0 20.6 0.0 40.3 23.3 5.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 33.5 17.2 34.1 37.2 0.7 40.0 20.6 0.0 40.3 23.3 5.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 48 15 7 30 0 34 28 0 46 90 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 107 76 26 56 0 74 60 0 92 157 61 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 245 571 180 328 361 193 646 735 225 619 784 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.38 0.56 0.09 0.37 0.12 0.38 0.12 0.01 0.44 0.38 0.52 Intersection Summary 469 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 103 159 143 16 120 42 72 76 8 96 231 398 Future Volume (vph) 103 159 143 16 120 42 72 76 8 96 231 398 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1595 2913 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1595 2913 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 105 162 146 16 122 43 73 78 8 98 236 406 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 126 0 0 0 39 0 0 5 0 0 268 Lane Group Flow (vph) 94 193 0 16 122 4 73 78 3 98 236 138 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 4% 18% 0% 10% 0% 26% 10% 0% 4% 4% 6% Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.7 10.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.7 28.2 28.2 8.1 27.1 27.1 Effective Green, g (s) 10.7 10.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.7 28.2 28.2 8.1 27.1 27.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.35 0.35 0.10 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 213 389 180 328 161 173 608 569 175 618 516 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.07 0.01 c0.04 0.05 0.05 c0.06 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.49 0.09 0.37 0.03 0.42 0.13 0.00 0.56 0.38 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 31.9 32.1 32.7 33.7 32.5 32.6 17.6 16.8 34.3 20.1 19.2 Progression Factor 0.86 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.9 1.3 0.4 1.5 0.1 2.3 0.4 0.0 4.9 1.8 1.3 Delay (s) 29.3 23.1 33.1 35.1 32.6 34.8 18.0 16.8 39.2 21.9 20.5 Level of Service C C C D C C B B D C C Approach Delay (s) 24.5 34.4 25.7 23.4 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 25.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 470 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB B14 NB Directions Served L T LR Maximum Queue (ft) 48 6 129 Average Queue (ft) 4 0 66 95th Queue (ft) 26 8 108 Link Distance (ft) 226 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 136 102 186 325 151 31 168 98 Average Queue (ft) 46 40 82 212 46 1 87 43 95th Queue (ft) 112 86 152 303 113 19 145 81 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 150 92 118 189 175 79 219 167 Average Queue (ft) 52 30 62 102 57 32 97 43 95th Queue (ft) 117 69 104 172 126 66 180 114 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 471 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L LT TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 163 174 185 41 106 105 52 132 123 19 132 199 Average Queue (ft) 64 71 88 8 46 37 23 56 34 3 57 85 95th Queue (ft) 129 133 151 28 88 85 48 114 93 12 107 156 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 415 415 415 945 977 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 134 Average Queue (ft) 62 95th Queue (ft) 108 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2 472 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 101 1 3 106 1 95 Future Vol, veh/h 101 1 3 106 1 95 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 4 0 86 Mvmt Flow 112 1 3 118 1 106 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 113 0 237 113 Stage 1 - - - - 113 - Stage 2 - - - - 124 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 7.06 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 4.074 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1489 - 756 754 Stage 1 - - - - 917 - Stage 2 - - - - 907 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1489 - 754 754 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 754 - Stage 1 - - - - 917 - Stage 2 - - - - 905 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 754 - - 1489 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.141 - - 0.002 - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.4 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0 - 473 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 268 286 192 158 85 v/c Ratio 0.21 0.69 0.11 0.53 0.29 Control Delay 14.7 37.1 12.6 36.4 4.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.7 37.1 12.6 36.4 4.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 135 13 73 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 49 229 73 125 17 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1270 562 1771 363 325 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.51 0.11 0.44 0.26 Intersection Summary 474 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 168 89 275 184 0 0 0 0 151 1 82 Future Volume (vph) 0 168 89 275 184 0 0 0 0 151 1 82 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3645 1736 2735 1708 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3645 1736 2735 1708 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 175 93 286 192 0 0 0 0 157 1 85 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 206 0 286 192 0 0 0 0 0 158 15 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 29% 46% 4% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 52% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.5 19.2 51.8 14.0 14.0 Effective Green, g (s) 26.5 19.2 51.8 14.0 14.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.24 0.65 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1207 416 1770 298 185 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 c0.16 0.07 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.69 0.11 0.53 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 19.0 27.7 5.3 30.0 27.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.05 2.16 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 5.0 0.1 2.3 0.3 Delay (s) 19.3 34.0 11.7 32.3 27.9 Level of Service B C B C C Approach Delay (s) 19.3 25.1 0.0 30.8 Approach LOS B C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 475 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 107 222 377 199 138 366 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.10 0.26 0.27 0.50 0.61 Control Delay 16.5 13.9 18.7 4.7 27.4 7.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.5 13.9 18.9 5.0 27.4 7.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 32 35 66 0 51 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 59 53 120 48 95 62 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 422 2124 1455 731 389 707 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 507 167 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.10 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.52 Intersection Summary 476 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 104 215 0 0 366 193 93 1 395 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 104 215 0 0 366 193 93 1 395 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1228 3505 3438 1455 1222 1490 Flt Permitted 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 544 3505 3438 1455 1222 1490 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 107 222 0 0 377 199 96 1 407 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 21 290 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 107 222 0 0 377 80 0 117 76 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 47% 3% 0% 0% 5% 11% 50% 100% 3% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 48.5 48.5 32.3 32.3 16.6 16.6 Effective Green, g (s) 48.5 48.5 32.3 32.3 16.6 16.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.40 0.40 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 398 2124 1388 587 253 309 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.06 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.06 0.10 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.10 0.27 0.14 0.46 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 7.3 6.6 16.0 15.1 27.8 26.5 Progression Factor 1.75 1.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.5 2.8 0.9 Delay (s) 13.2 11.9 16.5 15.5 30.5 27.3 Level of Service B B B B C C Approach Delay (s) 12.3 16.1 28.2 0.0 Approach LOS B B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 19.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 477 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 215 428 24 220 107 157 364 13 53 183 212 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.69 0.13 0.64 0.29 0.70 0.50 0.02 0.29 0.36 0.36 Control Delay 46.0 34.5 34.5 43.7 1.9 50.7 24.6 0.1 37.7 26.9 5.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.0 34.5 34.5 43.7 1.9 50.7 24.6 0.1 37.7 26.9 5.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 109 101 11 56 0 75 158 0 25 75 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #210 151 33 #93 0 #156 250 0 59 132 45 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 311 652 181 343 374 233 724 753 181 502 586 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.69 0.66 0.13 0.64 0.29 0.67 0.50 0.02 0.29 0.36 0.36 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 478 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 393 144 73 23 209 102 149 346 12 50 174 201 Future Volume (vph) 393 144 73 23 209 102 149 346 12 50 174 201 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1595 3232 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1595 3232 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 414 152 77 24 220 107 157 364 13 53 183 212 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 22 0 0 0 96 0 0 9 0 0 155 Lane Group Flow (vph) 215 406 0 24 220 11 157 364 4 53 183 57 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 14.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 11.0 26.9 26.9 4.8 21.2 21.2 Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 14.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 11.0 26.9 26.9 4.8 21.2 21.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 295 598 181 343 162 225 643 547 109 502 422 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.13 0.01 c0.06 c0.10 c0.19 0.03 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.04 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.68 0.13 0.64 0.07 0.70 0.57 0.01 0.49 0.36 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 30.5 30.2 32.5 34.3 32.3 32.6 21.5 17.4 36.1 23.6 22.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.3 3.3 0.7 5.5 0.4 9.8 3.6 0.0 4.6 2.0 0.7 Delay (s) 39.7 33.5 33.2 39.8 32.7 42.4 25.1 17.4 40.7 25.7 22.8 Level of Service D C C D C D C B D C C Approach Delay (s) 35.6 37.2 30.0 26.1 Approach LOS D D C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.4 Sum of lost time (s) 25.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 479 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served L LR Maximum Queue (ft) 10 120 Average Queue (ft) 1 62 95th Queue (ft) 7 100 Link Distance (ft) 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 140 94 125 274 159 45 182 94 Average Queue (ft) 48 39 52 153 56 1 86 40 95th Queue (ft) 112 78 103 236 127 16 151 77 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 154 81 111 183 164 123 314 272 Average Queue (ft) 61 29 58 90 70 55 158 87 95th Queue (ft) 123 65 97 157 137 97 270 218 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 480 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Background - Mitigation Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L LT TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 203 191 183 46 140 190 76 149 327 56 85 143 Average Queue (ft) 121 109 75 12 56 79 37 103 138 5 31 66 95th Queue (ft) 178 168 151 36 113 154 64 168 257 39 67 123 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 415 415 415 945 977 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 3 4 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 10 6 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 81 Average Queue (ft) 33 95th Queue (ft) 65 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 18 481 Appendix I 2031 Total Traffic Conditions Worksheets 482 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 214 0 22 170 0 90 Future Vol, veh/h 214 0 22 170 0 90 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 43 11 0 100 Mvmt Flow 225 0 23 179 0 95 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 225 0 - 225 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 4.53 - - 7.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.587 - - 4.2 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1135 - 0 621 Stage 1 - - - - 0 - Stage 2 - - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1135 - - 621 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.9 11.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 621 - - 1135 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.153 - - 0.02 - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.8 - - 8.2 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - 483 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 395 427 199 167 157 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.79 0.12 0.57 0.51 Control Delay 13.8 45.5 8.6 38.3 11.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.8 45.5 8.6 38.3 11.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 235 12 77 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 58 325 66 136 52 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1040 648 1721 327 321 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.38 0.66 0.12 0.51 0.49 Intersection Summary 484 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 176 192 397 185 0 0 0 0 154 1 146 Future Volume (vph) 0 176 192 397 185 0 0 0 0 154 1 146 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3342 1736 2635 1747 1035 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3342 1736 2635 1747 1035 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 189 206 427 199 0 0 0 0 166 1 157 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 131 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 244 0 427 199 0 0 0 0 0 167 26 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 41% 45% 4% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 100% 56% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.3 24.9 52.3 13.5 13.5 Effective Green, g (s) 21.3 24.9 52.3 13.5 13.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.31 0.65 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 889 540 1722 294 174 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.25 0.08 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.79 0.12 0.57 0.15 Uniform Delay, d1 23.2 25.2 5.2 30.6 28.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.40 1.55 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 7.9 0.1 3.0 0.6 Delay (s) 24.0 43.1 8.2 33.6 28.9 Level of Service C D A C C Approach Delay (s) 24.0 32.0 0.0 31.3 Approach LOS C C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 485 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 118 218 480 128 137 179 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.11 0.34 0.19 0.57 0.42 Control Delay 15.8 11.2 17.2 3.2 34.4 6.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.8 11.2 17.5 3.2 34.4 6.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 39 37 55 0 60 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 82 58 166 7 106 45 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 450 2054 1408 675 339 535 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 387 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.26 0.11 0.47 0.19 0.40 0.33 Intersection Summary 486 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 116 214 0 0 470 125 112 3 195 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 116 214 0 0 470 125 112 3 195 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1172 3374 3406 1404 1140 1395 Flt Permitted 0.38 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 467 3374 3406 1404 1140 1395 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 118 218 0 0 480 128 114 3 199 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 78 0 9 142 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 118 218 0 0 480 50 0 128 37 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 54% 7% 0% 0% 6% 15% 55% 67% 10% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 48.7 48.7 31.4 31.4 16.4 16.4 Effective Green, g (s) 48.7 48.7 31.4 31.4 16.4 16.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.39 0.39 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 364 2053 1336 551 233 285 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.06 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.16 0.04 0.11 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.11 0.36 0.09 0.55 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 7.3 6.5 17.2 15.3 28.5 26.0 Progression Factor 1.64 1.46 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.1 0.7 0.3 4.7 0.4 Delay (s) 12.7 9.6 15.2 15.7 33.2 26.4 Level of Service B A B B C C Approach Delay (s) 10.7 15.3 29.4 0.0 Approach LOS B B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 487 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 107 310 16 122 43 77 78 8 98 236 408 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.32 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.51 0.12 0.01 0.53 0.39 0.53 Control Delay 35.0 7.0 35.0 35.5 0.6 46.7 21.1 0.0 45.0 23.8 5.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 35.0 7.0 35.0 35.5 0.6 46.7 21.1 0.0 45.0 23.8 5.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 13 8 30 0 37 28 0 47 93 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 105 40 26 56 0 #86 60 0 #96 156 61 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 260 984 162 371 395 152 624 730 187 599 773 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.41 0.32 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.51 0.13 0.01 0.52 0.39 0.53 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 488 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 105 159 145 16 120 42 75 76 8 96 231 400 Future Volume (vph) 105 159 145 16 120 42 75 76 8 96 231 400 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 3028 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3028 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 107 162 148 16 122 43 77 78 8 98 236 408 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 105 0 0 0 35 0 0 6 0 0 301 Lane Group Flow (vph) 107 205 0 16 122 8 77 78 2 98 236 107 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 4% 18% 0% 10% 0% 26% 10% 0% 4% 4% 6% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.3 23.2 1.4 14.3 14.3 8.4 21.9 21.9 6.9 20.9 20.9 Effective Green, g (s) 10.3 23.2 1.4 14.3 14.3 8.4 21.9 21.9 6.9 20.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.29 0.02 0.18 0.18 0.11 0.27 0.27 0.09 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 225 878 31 586 288 150 472 442 149 477 398 v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 c0.07 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.05 c0.06 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.23 0.52 0.21 0.03 0.51 0.17 0.00 0.66 0.49 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 32.3 21.6 39.0 28.0 27.1 33.9 22.1 21.1 35.4 25.1 23.5 Progression Factor 0.88 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 0.2 26.0 0.4 0.1 3.9 0.8 0.0 11.0 3.6 1.6 Delay (s) 30.5 11.0 65.0 28.4 27.2 37.8 22.9 21.1 46.5 28.7 25.1 Level of Service C B E C C D C C D C C Approach Delay (s) 16.0 31.3 29.8 29.1 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 26.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 489 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 8 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 113 8 112 58 5 101 Future Vol, veh/h 113 8 112 58 5 101 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 2 11 2 2 Mvmt Flow 123 9 122 63 5 110 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 132 0 435 128 Stage 1 - - - - 128 - Stage 2 - - - - 307 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 578 922 Stage 1 - - - - 898 - Stage 2 - - - - 746 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 528 922 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 528 - Stage 1 - - - - 898 - Stage 2 - - - - 681 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 5.1 9.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 891 - - 1453 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.129 - - 0.084 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - 7.7 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.3 - 490 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Total Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB B14 B14 NB Directions Served L T R Maximum Queue (ft) 62 16 11 133 Average Queue (ft) 8 1 0 66 95th Queue (ft) 38 11 10 107 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 171 132 209 339 159 26 186 127 Average Queue (ft) 71 47 100 207 44 1 88 57 95th Queue (ft) 146 97 176 304 113 18 157 103 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 218 81 117 204 200 82 322 263 Average Queue (ft) 88 23 60 109 78 35 144 66 95th Queue (ft) 177 61 104 187 161 67 256 184 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 491 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Total Weekday AM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 189 145 148 52 116 126 54 139 130 18 140 191 Average Queue (ft) 75 47 67 14 48 44 24 58 33 2 62 85 95th Queue (ft) 148 104 121 41 96 97 50 114 84 11 116 157 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 427 427 427 945 980 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 156 Average Queue (ft) 65 95th Queue (ft) 120 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served LT LR Maximum Queue (ft) 56 64 Average Queue (ft) 14 36 95th Queue (ft) 45 56 Link Distance (ft) 605 614 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 3 492 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 0 3 126 0 80 Future Vol, veh/h 163 0 3 126 0 80 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 4 0 100 Mvmt Flow 181 0 3 140 0 89 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 181 0 - 181 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - - 7.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - - 4.2 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1407 - 0 662 Stage 1 - - - - 0 - Stage 2 - - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1407 - - 662 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 662 - - 1407 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.134 - - 0.002 - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.3 - - 7.6 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0 - 493 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 317 286 203 158 95 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.71 0.12 0.51 0.32 Control Delay 14.2 39.1 15.5 35.1 5.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.2 39.1 15.5 35.1 5.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 25 155 28 73 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 54 232 87 120 22 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1290 450 1754 469 384 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.64 0.12 0.34 0.25 Intersection Summary 494 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 192 112 275 195 0 0 0 0 151 1 91 Future Volume (vph) 0 192 112 275 195 0 0 0 0 151 1 91 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3622 1736 2735 1708 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3622 1736 2735 1708 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 200 117 286 203 0 0 0 0 157 1 95 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 239 0 286 203 0 0 0 0 0 158 17 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 29% 46% 4% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 52% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.7 18.5 51.3 14.5 14.5 Effective Green, g (s) 26.7 18.5 51.3 14.5 14.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.23 0.64 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1208 401 1753 309 192 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.16 0.07 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.71 0.12 0.51 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 19.0 28.3 5.6 29.6 27.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.04 2.50 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 6.2 0.1 1.9 0.3 Delay (s) 19.4 35.6 14.0 31.5 27.5 Level of Service B D B C C Approach Delay (s) 19.4 26.6 0.0 30.0 Approach LOS B C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 495 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 131 223 379 199 147 366 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.11 0.28 0.28 0.52 0.60 Control Delay 15.3 11.6 13.3 2.2 27.5 7.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 Total Delay 15.3 11.6 13.4 2.5 27.8 7.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 39 34 33 0 55 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 72 54 83 m0 98 60 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 427 2093 1377 702 447 763 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 299 145 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 62 0 0 73 93 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.31 0.11 0.35 0.36 0.39 0.55 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 496 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 127 216 0 0 368 193 102 1 395 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 127 216 0 0 368 193 102 1 395 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1228 3505 3438 1455 1217 1490 Flt Permitted 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 536 3505 3438 1455 1217 1490 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 131 223 0 0 379 199 105 1 407 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 123 0 21 287 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 131 223 0 0 379 76 0 126 79 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 47% 3% 0% 0% 5% 11% 50% 100% 3% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 47.8 47.8 30.4 30.4 17.3 17.3 Effective Green, g (s) 47.8 47.8 30.4 30.4 17.3 17.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.38 0.38 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 399 2094 1306 552 263 322 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.06 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.05 0.10 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.11 0.29 0.14 0.48 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 7.8 6.9 17.3 16.2 27.4 25.9 Progression Factor 1.46 1.40 0.64 0.31 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.4 2.9 0.8 Delay (s) 12.0 9.8 11.5 5.5 30.3 26.8 Level of Service B A B A C C Approach Delay (s) 10.6 9.4 27.8 0.0 Approach LOS B A C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 497 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 230 24 220 107 158 364 13 53 183 213 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.18 0.15 0.65 0.23 0.73 0.64 0.02 0.29 0.51 0.37 Control Delay 61.0 10.9 36.3 44.3 1.1 54.4 34.0 0.1 38.1 34.9 1.8 Queue Delay 43.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 104.7 10.9 36.3 44.3 1.1 54.4 34.0 0.1 38.1 34.9 1.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 208 7 11 56 0 77 177 0 25 83 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #373 29 34 #94 0 #164 #328 0 59 146 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 435 1290 157 340 475 223 572 723 180 360 578 Starvation Cap Reductn 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.20 0.18 0.15 0.65 0.23 0.71 0.64 0.02 0.29 0.51 0.37 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 498 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 393 144 74 23 209 102 150 346 12 50 174 202 Future Volume (vph) 393 144 74 23 209 102 150 346 12 50 174 202 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 3404 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 3404 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 414 152 78 24 220 107 158 364 13 53 183 213 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 50 0 0 0 91 0 0 10 0 0 183 Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 180 0 24 220 16 158 364 3 53 183 30 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 19.9 29.2 2.8 12.1 12.1 10.7 16.6 16.6 4.8 11.2 11.2 Effective Green, g (s) 19.9 29.2 2.8 12.1 12.1 10.7 16.6 16.6 4.8 11.2 11.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.36 0.03 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.14 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 7.1 5.5 6.8 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 435 1242 63 515 244 217 394 335 108 263 221 v/s Ratio Prot c0.24 0.05 0.01 c0.06 c0.10 c0.19 0.03 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.95 0.15 0.38 0.43 0.07 0.73 0.92 0.01 0.49 0.70 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 29.6 17.0 37.8 30.8 29.1 33.3 31.1 25.2 36.4 32.8 30.2 Progression Factor 0.92 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 29.6 0.1 7.9 1.2 0.2 12.3 29.7 0.0 4.7 14.2 1.3 Delay (s) 56.9 13.9 45.6 32.0 29.3 45.5 60.8 25.2 41.1 47.0 31.4 Level of Service E B D C C D E C D D C Approach Delay (s) 41.5 32.1 55.4 38.9 Approach LOS D C E D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 43.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 26.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 499 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 8 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 101 2 20 106 4 62 Future Vol, veh/h 101 2 20 106 4 62 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 2 4 2 2 Mvmt Flow 110 2 22 115 4 67 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 112 0 270 111 Stage 1 - - - - 111 - Stage 2 - - - - 159 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1478 - 719 942 Stage 1 - - - - 914 - Stage 2 - - - - 870 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1478 - 707 942 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 707 - Stage 1 - - - - 914 - Stage 2 - - - - 856 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.2 9.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 923 - - 1478 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.078 - - 0.015 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 - 500 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Total Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB B14 NB Directions Served L T R Maximum Queue (ft) 10 3 131 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 61 95th Queue (ft) 6 4 106 Link Distance (ft) 226 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 153 102 166 326 200 55 183 108 Average Queue (ft) 61 40 66 153 72 3 87 44 95th Queue (ft) 130 80 129 255 144 28 151 86 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 207 105 128 161 153 102 544 424 Average Queue (ft) 87 30 62 74 60 48 314 226 95th Queue (ft) 166 77 106 131 116 86 638 497 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 10 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) 14 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 28 3 501 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Total Weekday PM - 2031 Total VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 238 221 218 60 138 172 96 150 459 125 85 164 Average Queue (ft) 194 122 89 20 61 81 45 111 192 9 34 80 95th Queue (ft) 253 245 216 51 117 149 80 179 369 68 72 144 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 427 427 427 945 980 Upstream Blk Time (%) 26 8 4 Queuing Penalty (veh) 53 17 9 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 4 14 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 13 23 0 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 107 Average Queue (ft) 38 95th Queue (ft) 78 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Intersection: 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served LT LR Maximum Queue (ft) 40 63 Average Queue (ft) 3 30 95th Queue (ft) 19 53 Link Distance (ft) 605 614 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 145 502 Appendix J 2031 Total Traffic Conditions Worksheets: Mitigation 503 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 214 0 22 170 0 90 Future Vol, veh/h 214 0 22 170 0 90 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 43 11 0 100 Mvmt Flow 225 0 23 179 0 95 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 225 0 - 225 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 4.53 - - 7.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.587 - - 4.2 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1135 - 0 621 Stage 1 - - - - 0 - Stage 2 - - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1135 - - 621 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.9 11.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 621 - - 1135 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.153 - - 0.02 - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.8 - - 8.2 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0.1 - 504 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 395 427 199 167 157 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.79 0.12 0.57 0.51 Control Delay 13.9 39.1 13.0 38.3 11.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.9 39.1 13.0 38.3 11.8 Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 226 23 77 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 59 322 73 136 52 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1033 664 1721 327 321 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.38 0.64 0.12 0.51 0.49 Intersection Summary 505 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 176 192 397 185 0 0 0 0 154 1 146 Future Volume (vph) 0 176 192 397 185 0 0 0 0 154 1 146 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3342 1736 2635 1747 1035 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3342 1736 2635 1747 1035 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 189 206 427 199 0 0 0 0 166 1 157 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 131 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 244 0 427 199 0 0 0 0 0 167 26 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 41% 45% 4% 37% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 100% 56% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 21.2 25.0 52.3 13.5 13.5 Effective Green, g (s) 21.2 25.0 52.3 13.5 13.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.31 0.65 0.17 0.17 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 885 542 1722 294 174 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.25 0.08 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.79 0.12 0.57 0.15 Uniform Delay, d1 23.3 25.1 5.2 30.6 28.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.17 2.35 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 7.6 0.1 3.0 0.6 Delay (s) 24.1 36.8 12.3 33.6 28.9 Level of Service C D B C C Approach Delay (s) 24.1 29.0 0.0 31.3 Approach LOS C C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 506 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 118 218 480 128 137 179 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.11 0.33 0.19 0.58 0.42 Control Delay 17.7 14.7 18.3 3.9 36.0 7.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.7 14.7 18.6 3.9 36.0 7.1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 36 87 0 61 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 67 55 142 0 111 46 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 392 2070 1450 690 310 505 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 423 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.11 0.47 0.19 0.44 0.35 Intersection Summary 507 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 116 214 0 0 470 125 112 3 195 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 116 214 0 0 470 125 112 3 195 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1172 3374 3406 1404 1140 1395 Flt Permitted 0.38 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 470 3374 3406 1404 1140 1395 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 118 218 0 0 480 128 114 3 199 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 8 143 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 118 218 0 0 480 52 0 129 36 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 54% 7% 0% 0% 6% 15% 55% 67% 10% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 49.1 49.1 32.4 32.4 16.0 16.0 Effective Green, g (s) 49.1 49.1 32.4 32.4 16.0 16.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.61 0.40 0.40 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 363 2070 1379 568 228 279 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.06 0.14 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.04 0.11 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.11 0.35 0.09 0.57 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 7.2 6.4 16.5 14.7 28.9 26.3 Progression Factor 1.96 2.01 0.97 1.53 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.3 5.2 0.4 Delay (s) 14.7 12.9 16.5 22.7 34.1 26.7 Level of Service B B B C C C Approach Delay (s) 13.5 17.9 29.9 0.0 Approach LOS B B C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 19.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 508 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 96 321 16 122 43 77 78 8 98 236 408 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.62 0.09 0.37 0.12 0.44 0.12 0.01 0.47 0.38 0.52 Control Delay 34.4 22.8 34.1 37.2 0.7 40.2 20.7 0.0 40.3 23.6 5.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 34.4 22.8 34.1 37.2 0.7 40.2 20.7 0.0 40.3 23.6 5.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 49 17 7 30 0 36 28 0 46 91 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 110 92 26 56 0 77 60 0 92 158 62 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 249 579 180 328 361 197 644 733 225 614 782 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.55 0.09 0.37 0.12 0.39 0.12 0.01 0.44 0.38 0.52 Intersection Summary 509 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 105 159 145 16 120 42 75 76 8 96 231 400 Future Volume (vph) 105 159 145 16 120 42 75 76 8 96 231 400 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1595 2910 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1595 2910 1805 3282 1615 1433 1727 1615 1736 1827 1524 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 107 162 148 16 122 43 77 78 8 98 236 408 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 128 0 0 0 39 0 0 5 0 0 271 Lane Group Flow (vph) 96 193 0 16 122 4 77 78 3 98 236 137 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 4% 18% 0% 10% 0% 26% 10% 0% 4% 4% 6% Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.7 10.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.9 28.2 28.2 8.1 26.9 26.9 Effective Green, g (s) 10.7 10.7 8.0 8.0 8.0 9.9 28.2 28.2 8.1 26.9 26.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.35 0.35 0.10 0.34 0.34 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 213 389 180 328 161 177 608 569 175 614 512 v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.07 0.01 c0.04 0.05 0.05 c0.06 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.50 0.09 0.37 0.03 0.44 0.13 0.00 0.56 0.38 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 31.9 32.1 32.7 33.7 32.5 32.5 17.6 16.8 34.3 20.2 19.4 Progression Factor 0.88 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 1.3 0.4 1.5 0.1 2.3 0.4 0.0 4.9 1.8 1.3 Delay (s) 30.2 34.0 33.1 35.1 32.6 34.8 18.0 16.8 39.2 22.1 20.6 Level of Service C C C D C C B B D C C Approach Delay (s) 33.1 34.4 25.9 23.5 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 25.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 510 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 8 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 113 8 112 58 5 101 Future Vol, veh/h 113 8 112 58 5 101 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 2 11 2 2 Mvmt Flow 123 9 122 63 5 110 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 132 0 435 128 Stage 1 - - - - 128 - Stage 2 - - - - 307 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 578 922 Stage 1 - - - - 898 - Stage 2 - - - - 746 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 528 922 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 528 - Stage 1 - - - - 898 - Stage 2 - - - - 681 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 5.1 9.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 891 - - 1453 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.129 - - 0.084 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - 7.7 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.3 - 511 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement EB WB NB Directions Served TR L R Maximum Queue (ft) 3 63 146 Average Queue (ft) 0 7 68 95th Queue (ft) 3 36 118 Link Distance (ft) 605 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 179 130 216 325 177 47 178 123 Average Queue (ft) 73 45 102 208 62 2 89 56 95th Queue (ft) 149 94 181 306 138 26 156 97 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 215 84 112 197 197 92 306 249 Average Queue (ft) 81 31 58 113 82 38 141 67 95th Queue (ft) 161 64 100 182 160 74 250 180 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 1 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 512 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday AM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L LT TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 179 163 178 40 104 101 52 133 116 19 138 170 Average Queue (ft) 65 75 90 8 45 40 22 57 33 2 56 80 95th Queue (ft) 133 134 154 28 88 85 47 114 81 11 110 147 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 415 415 415 945 977 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 138 Average Queue (ft) 63 95th Queue (ft) 114 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served LT LR Maximum Queue (ft) 59 68 Average Queue (ft) 14 35 95th Queue (ft) 43 56 Link Distance (ft) 605 614 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 3 513 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 0 3 126 0 80 Future Vol, veh/h 163 0 3 126 0 80 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 100 - - 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 0 4 0 100 Mvmt Flow 181 0 3 140 0 89 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 181 0 - 181 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - - 7.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - - 4.2 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1407 - 0 662 Stage 1 - - - - 0 - Stage 2 - - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1407 - - 662 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 662 - - 1407 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.134 - - 0.002 - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.3 - - 7.6 - HCM Lane LOS B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0 - 514 Queues VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 2 Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 317 286 203 158 95 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.69 0.11 0.53 0.33 Control Delay 14.2 39.3 12.2 36.4 6.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.2 39.3 12.2 36.4 6.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 25 142 6 73 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 54 230 78 125 23 Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 481 849 Turn Bay Length (ft) 640 Base Capacity (vph) 1286 540 1771 363 325 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.53 0.11 0.44 0.29 Intersection Summary 515 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 0 192 112 275 195 0 0 0 0 151 1 91 Future Volume (vph) 0 192 112 275 195 0 0 0 0 151 1 91 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3622 1736 2735 1708 1062 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3622 1736 2735 1708 1062 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 200 117 286 203 0 0 0 0 157 1 95 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 239 0 286 203 0 0 0 0 0 158 17 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 29% 46% 4% 32% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 52% Turn Type NA Prot NA Split NA Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 3 3 Permitted Phases 3 Actuated Green, G (s) 26.7 19.0 51.8 14.0 14.0 Effective Green, g (s) 26.7 19.0 51.8 14.0 14.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.24 0.65 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s) 6.2 6.1 6.2 8.0 8.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1208 412 1770 298 185 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.16 0.07 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.69 0.11 0.53 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 19.0 27.8 5.4 30.0 27.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.12 2.08 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 5.3 0.1 2.3 0.3 Delay (s) 19.4 36.3 11.3 32.3 27.9 Level of Service B D B C C Approach Delay (s) 19.4 25.9 0.0 30.7 Approach LOS B C A C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 516 Queues VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 4 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 131 223 379 199 147 366 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.11 0.27 0.28 0.53 0.61 Control Delay 15.6 12.3 24.4 11.3 29.1 7.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 Total Delay 15.6 12.3 24.5 11.6 29.2 7.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 33 95 0 56 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 65 51 130 m71 105 63 Internal Link Dist (ft) 481 191 609 Turn Bay Length (ft) 480 Base Capacity (vph) 435 2114 1411 714 372 693 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 396 181 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 10 12 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.11 0.37 0.37 0.41 0.54 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 517 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 127 216 0 0 368 193 102 1 395 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 127 216 0 0 368 193 102 1 395 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1228 3505 3438 1455 1217 1490 Flt Permitted 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 539 3505 3438 1455 1217 1490 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 131 223 0 0 379 199 105 1 407 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 121 0 20 289 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 131 223 0 0 379 78 0 127 77 0 0 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 47% 3% 0% 0% 5% 11% 50% 100% 3% 0% 0% 0% Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 4 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 48.3 48.3 31.2 31.2 16.8 16.8 Effective Green, g (s) 48.3 48.3 31.2 31.2 16.8 16.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.39 0.39 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6.7 6.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 402 2116 1340 567 255 312 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.06 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.05 0.10 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.11 0.28 0.14 0.50 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 7.6 6.7 16.7 15.7 27.9 26.3 Progression Factor 1.58 1.57 1.25 2.63 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.4 3.2 0.9 Delay (s) 12.6 10.6 21.4 41.9 31.1 27.2 Level of Service B B C D C C Approach Delay (s) 11.3 28.4 28.3 0.0 Approach LOS B C C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 23.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 518 Queues VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 6 Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 215 429 24 220 107 158 364 13 53 183 213 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.67 0.13 0.65 0.29 0.67 0.51 0.02 0.29 0.38 0.37 Control Delay 40.0 49.4 34.8 44.3 1.9 47.1 25.2 0.1 38.1 28.3 5.7 Queue Delay 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.4 49.7 34.8 44.3 1.9 47.1 25.2 0.1 38.1 28.3 5.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) 110 113 11 56 0 75 161 0 25 78 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #204 151 33 #94 0 #149 255 0 59 137 48 Internal Link Dist (ft) 191 394 920 966 Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 150 280 240 290 Base Capacity (vph) 328 688 180 340 373 252 719 748 180 482 570 Starvation Cap Reductn 10 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.68 0.66 0.13 0.65 0.29 0.63 0.51 0.02 0.29 0.38 0.37 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 519 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis VA Technology Park 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 393 144 74 23 209 102 150 346 12 50 174 202 Future Volume (vph) 393 144 74 23 209 102 150 346 12 50 174 202 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1595 3231 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1595 3231 1805 3406 1615 1626 1900 1615 1805 1881 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 414 152 78 24 220 107 158 364 13 53 183 213 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 23 0 0 0 96 0 0 9 0 0 158 Lane Group Flow (vph) 215 406 0 24 220 11 158 364 4 53 183 55 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% Turn Type Split NA Split NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.3 15.3 8.0 8.0 8.0 11.6 26.9 26.9 4.8 20.6 20.6 Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 15.3 8.0 8.0 8.0 11.6 26.9 26.9 4.8 20.6 20.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 7.6 5.8 5.8 8.5 6.2 6.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 305 617 180 340 161 235 638 543 108 484 407 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.13 0.01 c0.06 c0.10 c0.19 0.03 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.66 0.13 0.65 0.07 0.67 0.57 0.01 0.49 0.38 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 30.2 29.9 32.8 34.6 32.6 32.4 21.8 17.7 36.4 24.4 22.8 Progression Factor 0.92 1.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.0 2.8 0.7 5.7 0.4 8.0 3.7 0.0 4.7 2.2 0.7 Delay (s) 34.8 49.9 33.5 40.3 33.0 40.4 25.5 17.7 41.1 26.7 23.5 Level of Service C D C D C D C B D C C Approach Delay (s) 44.9 37.6 29.7 26.9 Approach LOS D D C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 35.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 25.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 520 HCM 6th TWSC VA Technology Park 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park Synchro 11 Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 8 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 101 2 20 106 4 62 Future Vol, veh/h 101 2 20 106 4 62 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 0 2 4 2 2 Mvmt Flow 110 2 22 115 4 67 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 112 0 270 111 Stage 1 - - - - 111 - Stage 2 - - - - 159 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1478 - 719 942 Stage 1 - - - - 914 - Stage 2 - - - - 870 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1478 - 707 942 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 707 - Stage 1 - - - - 914 - Stage 2 - - - - 856 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.2 9.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 923 - - 1478 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.078 - - 0.015 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 - 521 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 1 Intersection: 1: Zachary Ann Ln & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served L R Maximum Queue (ft) 4 121 Average Queue (ft) 0 62 95th Queue (ft) 4 103 Link Distance (ft) 649 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: I-81 SB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB SB SB Directions Served T T TR L T T LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 156 92 170 276 160 52 174 110 Average Queue (ft) 62 38 63 152 55 2 87 43 95th Queue (ft) 130 73 122 242 129 28 150 85 Link Distance (ft) 226 226 226 503 503 503 878 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 640 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: I-81 NB Ramps & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB Directions Served L T T T T R LTR R Maximum Queue (ft) 185 92 111 184 177 117 326 290 Average Queue (ft) 74 26 57 102 80 59 169 100 95th Queue (ft) 147 65 97 166 148 99 289 239 Link Distance (ft) 503 503 503 195 195 195 638 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 480 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 522 Queuing and Blocking Report VA Technology Park Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation VA Technology Park SimTraffic Report Weekday PM - 2031 Total - Mitigation Page 2 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L LT TR L T T R L T R L T Maximum Queue (ft) 201 188 160 50 151 202 87 149 331 23 82 154 Average Queue (ft) 112 111 86 13 59 88 39 101 142 4 33 67 95th Queue (ft) 176 171 142 36 118 165 68 165 261 17 69 126 Link Distance (ft) 195 195 195 415 415 415 945 977 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 280 240 Storage Blk Time (%) 3 5 Queuing Penalty (veh) 10 8 Intersection: 4: US 11 & Rest Church Rd Movement SB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 91 Average Queue (ft) 33 95th Queue (ft) 66 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 5: Technology Park Rd & Rest Church Rd Movement WB NB Directions Served LT LR Maximum Queue (ft) 40 58 Average Queue (ft) 2 29 95th Queue (ft) 20 51 Link Distance (ft) 605 614 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 19 523 Planning Commission Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2026 Agenda Section: Public Hearings Title: Rezoning #05-26 for Busy Beez (Clear Brook Rentals, LLC) - (Mr. Bittner) Attachments: PC06-03-26REZ05-26_Redacted.pdf 524 REZONING #05-26 Clearbrook Rentals, LLC Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: May 27, 2026 Staff Contact: Eric Bittner, Planner II Executive Summary: Meeting Schedule Planning Commission: June 3, 2026 Action: Public Hearing; pending Board of Supervisors: July 8, 2026 Action: Public Hearing; pending Property Information Property Identification Number (PIN) 33-A-93 Address 4489 Martinsburg Pike, Winchester Magisterial District Stonewall Acreage +/- 0.56-acres Zoning & Present Land Use Zoning: B2 (General Business) with proffers Land Use: Commercial Proposed Zoning B2 with revised proffers Adjoining Property Zoning & Present Land Use North: RA (Rural Area) District Land Use: Vacant South: RA (Rural Area) District Land Use: Residential East: RA (Rural Area) District Land Use: Residential West: B3 (Industrial Transition) District Land Use: Automative Repair Proposed Use This is a request to rezone +/-0.56-acres from B2 (General Business) Zoning District with proffers to B2 Zoning District with revised proffers. The proposed proffers would enable “health care services” as a permitted use. Positives Concerns The proposed rezoning does not otherwise change the existing zoning or the property, B2, and remains in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Right-of-Way advances the Eastern Road Plan. The proposed rezoning does not further the land use policies of the NELUP and the designated long range land use category. 525 Page 2 of 4 Review Agency Comments: Review Agency Comment Date Comment Summary Status Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) 01/29/2026 “VDOT has no comments on the rezoning.” Frederick Water 2/18/2026 No comment Frederick County Inspections 2/3/2026 “No comment.” Frederick County Public Works 1/29/2026 “No comments- no proposed changes to grading or stormwater infrastructure.” Frederick County Fire Marshal 1/30/2026 “Approved, no existing fire department features to be removed without the permission of the Fire Official.” Frederick County Attorney 02/18/2026 No comment. Legal form. Planning & Zoning Staff Analysis: Site History: A rezoning application (REZ #05-01) was approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 12, 2001, which rezoned the property from the RA (Rural Area) Zoning District to B3 (Industrial Transition) Zoning District and B2 (General Business) Zoning District with proffers, restricting some uses, including health services, and providing a cash proffer to mitigate Fire and Rescue impacts. The existing structure was built in 2011 in conformance with an approved site plan, SP #27-10. The proposed rezoning would keep the zoning designation, B2, but amend the approved proffer statement to add “health care services” as a permitted use The proposed use was proffered out of being permitted in the previous rezoning but is otherwise already considered a permitted use in the B2 (General Business District). 526 Page 3 of 4 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: The Comprehensive Plan (adopted November 2021) and the Northeast Land Use Area Plan provide guidance on the future development of the subject property. The Plan identifies the subject properties with a “mixed use industrial office” (MUIO) land use designation and as being within the limits of the Urban Development Area (UDA). The Northeast Land Use Area Plan describes the future environment envisioned for the mixes use industrial office. “These areas are intended to develop with targeted growth sectors identified by the County’s Economic Development Authority (EDA), as well as similar industries that are likely to bring higher wages, professional and/or technology jobs. Uses which significantly contribute to air, noise, and light pollution as well as business that create large volumes of truck traffic are discouraged in these areas. Consideration of uses outside the identified targeted businesses should only be considered if they are secondary and complementary to these targeted businesses.” The intent of the B2 zoning district is described in §165-604.01 as: “…[providing] large areas for a variety of business, office and service uses. General business areas are located on arterial highways at major intersections and at interchange areas. Businesses allowed involve frequent and direct access by the general public but not heavy truck traffic on a constant basis other than that required for delivery of retail goods. General business areas should have direct access to major thoroughfares and should be properly separated from residential areas. Adequate frontage and depth should be provided, and access should be properly controlled to promote safety and orderly development. Nuisance factors are to be avoided. …” The proposal for additional allowed use (health care services) does not otherwise further the plan policy for MUIO and is not identified as an EDA targeted industry in the Comprehensive Plan. The B2 Zoning District is also not typically associated with the planned land use. However, given the existing zoning of the property is B2, the proposed rezoning does not otherwise modify the current use of the property as “commercial.” Transportation & Site Access: Martinsburg Pike is identified in the Eastern Road Plan as an “improved major collector,” as part of the rezoning, additional right-of-way for the ultimate condition is proffered to be dedicated. The property has no other road frontage. 527 Page 4 of 4 Proffer Statement, Generalized Development Plan (GDP), & Impact Analysis: Proffers (February 23, 2026) Staff Comment A)Land Use Restrictions Allows “Health Care Services, Including Skilled Nursing Facilities,” as a permitted use. B)Access Management Restricts access to a shared entrance. Proffers 10’ of ROW. C) Structural Development Limitation Restricts building size to 3,000 sq. Ft. D)Monetary Contributions to Offset Impact of Development The proffer statement fully implements the adopted Board of Supervisors policy on monetary proffers for commercial/industrial square footage. This is a rezoning requiring a public hearing. Following a public hearing, Staff are seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors on this rezoning application. 528 529 530 531 Greenway Engineering Busy Beez Daycare Rezoning File #2624J/MMW 1 PROFFER STATEMENT REZONING: RZ# General Business District (B2) with Proffers to Business General District (B2) with Revised Proffers PROPERTY: 0.56 acres +/-; Tax Parcels #33-((A))-92 & 33-((A))-93 RECORD OWNER: Timothy W. Johnson & Margo D. Johnson (TM# 33-A-92) Clear Brook Rentals, LLC (Timothy W. Johnson) (TM# 33-A-93) APPLICANT: Timothy W. Johnson & Margo D. Johnson and Clear Brook Rentals LLC (here-in after “the Applicant”) PROJECT NAME: Busy Beez Daycare Rezoning ORIGINAL DATE OF PROFFERS: May 9, 2001 REVISION DATE: October 1, 2010 April 8, 2026 May 7, 2026 Preliminary Matters Pursuant to Section 15.2-2296 Et. Seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and the provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional zoning, the undersigned Applicant hereby proffers that in the event the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, shall approve Rezoning Application #_____ for the rezoning of 1.89± acres from the Industrial Transition (B3) District with Proffers to the Industrial Transition (B3) District and Business General (B2) District with Revised Proffers, development of the subject property shall be done in conformity with the terms and conditions set forth herein, except to the extent that such terms and conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the Applicant and such be approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors in accordance with the said Code and Zoning Ordinance. In the event that such rezoning is not granted, then these proffers shall be deemed withdrawn and have no effect whatsoever. These proffers shall be binding upon this Applicant and their legal successors, heirs, or assigns. These proffers are a conditional zoning amendment to Rezoning #0-10 of Timothy W. Johnson, approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on November 10, 2010. The subject properties are more particularly described as the land owned by Clear Brook Rentals, LLC being all of Tax Map Parcel 33-((A))-93 and further described by 532 Greenway Engineering Busy Beez Daycare Rezoning File #2624J/MMW 2 Instrument No. 100001314, and the land owned by Timothy W. Johnson & Margo D. Johnson being all of Tax Map Parcel 33-((A))-92 and further described by Instrument No. 060001525, and are further described by the Boundary Survey Plat prepared by W. Stuart Dunn, L.S., dated June 6, 1996 and recorded as Deed Book 860 Page 1476 (see attached Boundary Survey Plat). PROFFERED CONDITIONS A.) Allowed Uses 1)The following land uses shall be permitted within the B-2, Business General District on tax map parcel 33-((A))-93: Broad casting and Content Providers. Services to buildings and Dwellings including Pest Control, Janitorial Services and Carpet Cleaning Services excluding Landscape Services and Production Sterilization. Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance excluding Motorcycle Repair. Adult and Child day-care facilities. Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional and Similar Originations. Self-service storage facilities. Public Administration and Government Support Buildings, including Fire and Ambulance Services. Public Utility excluding energy-generating facilities. Health Care Services including Skilled Nursing Facilities All other land uses within the B-2, Business General District shall not be permitted on tax map parcel 33-((A))-93 unless approved through a subsequent conditional zoning amendment. B.) Access Management 1.) Tax map parcels 33-((A))-93 shall be served by the existing commercial entrance on Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11). 2.) The Applicant hereby proffers to dedicate required right-of-way along the Martinsburg Pike (U.S. Route 11) frontage of tax map parcel 33-((A))-93 to accommodate the future widening of this corridor. This one time right-of-way dedication shall not exceed 10 feet in width and shall occur subsequent to the final Martinsburg Pike design plan approval. The Applicant shall provide the required right-of-way dedication within 90 days of written request by Frederick County and/or VDOT. 533 Greenway Engineering Busy Beez Daycare Rezoning File #2624J/MMW 3 C.) Structural Development Limitation 1.) Tax map parcel 33-((A))-93 shall be limited to a maximum structural area of 3,000 square feet for all land uses, exclusive of self-service storage facilities, identified in Section A(1) of the proffer statement. D.) Monetary Contribution to Offset Impact of Development The Applicant hereby proffers that in the event rezoning application #_____ is approved, the undersigned will pay to the Treasurer of Frederick County, Virginia $0.10 per square footage of structural area developed subsequent to approval of this rezoning application. This monetary contribution is intended to offset impacts to fire and rescue services and will be paid prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the first land use constructed on tax map parcel 33-((A))-93. Please refer to Page 4 and Page 5 of the Proffer Statement for Notarized Owner Signatures E.) Signatures The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in the interest of the Applicant and owner of tax map parcel 33- ((A))-93. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants this rezoning and accepts the conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully Submitted: By: Timothy W. Johnson Date By: 534 Greenway Engineering Busy Beez Daycare Rezoning File #2624J/MMW 4 Margo D. Johnson Date Commonwealth of Virginia, City/County of To Wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20 by Notary Public My Commission Expires E.) Signatures The conditions proffered above shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in the interest of the Applicant and owner of tax map parcel 33- ((A))-92. In the event the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grants this rezoning and accepts the conditions, the proffered conditions shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to other requirements set forth in the Frederick County Code. Respectfully Submitted: By: Clear Brook Rentals LLC (Timothy W. Johnson) Date 535 Greenway Engineering Busy Beez Daycare Rezoning File #2624J/MMW 5 Commonwealth of Virginia, City/County of To Wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20 by Notary Public My Commission Expires 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 Project Name: ________________________________________________ Acreage: ___________ PIN(s): __________________ Address (or general location): Existing Zoning District: ____________________________________________ Proposed Zoning District: ___________________________________________ Staff Name (Email Address): _________________________________________ Agency Name Completing Comments (select one): ____ Frederick Water ____ Virginia Department of Transportation ____ Winchester Regional Airport ____ Virginia Department of Health ____ Historic Resources Advisory Board ____ Frederick County (FC) Public Schools ____ FC Public Works ____ FC Inspections ____ FC Fire Marshal ____ FC Parks & Recreation ____ FC County Attorney ____ Other (Specify): ________________________ Resubmission to address comments requested? Y _____ or N _____ REQUEST FOR REZONING COMMENTS Reviewer Name (Email Address): _____________________________________________________ Review Agency Comments: *Comments that may not fit in the box should be attached to the cover sheet on agency or department letterhead. 546 Project Name: ________________________________________________ Acreage: ___________ PIN(s): __________________ Address (or general location): Existing Zoning District: ____________________________________________ Proposed Zoning District: ___________________________________________ Staff Name (Email Address): _________________________________________ Agency Name Completing Comments (select one): ____ Frederick Water ____ Virginia Department of Transportation ____ Winchester Regional Airport ____ Virginia Department of Health ____ Historic Resources Advisory Board ____ Frederick County (FC) Public Schools ____ FC Public Works ____ FC Inspections ____ FC Fire Marshal ____ FC Parks & Recreation ____ FC County Attorney ____ Other (Specify): ________________________ Resubmission to address comments requested? Y _____ or N _____ REQUEST FOR REZONING COMMENTS Reviewer Name (Email Address): _____________________________________________________ Review Agency Comments: *Comments that may not fit in the box should be attached to the cover sheet on agency or department letterhead. Busy Bee Daycare Proffer Amendment .56 33-A-93 4498 Martinsburg Pike B2(with proffers) B2(with Proffers) eric.bittner@fcva.us Andrew Fox (andrew.fox@fcva.us) The proffer statement meets the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia and is legally sufficient as proposed for recordation. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as my understanding is that review is being undertaken by staff and the Planning Commission. 4 4 547 Project Name: ________________________________________________ Acreage: ___________ PIN(s): __________________ Address (or general location): Existing Zoning District: ____________________________________________ Proposed Zoning District: ___________________________________________ Staff Name (Email Address): _________________________________________ Agency Name Completing Comments (select one): ____ Frederick Water ____ Virginia Department of Transportation ____ Winchester Regional Airport ____ Virginia Department of Health ____ Historic Resources Advisory Board ____ Frederick County (FC) Public Schools ____ FC Public Works ____ FC Inspections ____ FC Fire Marshal ____ FC Parks & Recreation ____ FC County Attorney ____ Other (Specify): ________________________ Resubmission to address comments requested? Y _____ or N _____ REQUEST FOR REZONING COMMENTS Reviewer Name (Email Address): _____________________________________________________ Review Agency Comments: *Comments that may not fit in the box should be attached to the cover sheet on agency or department letterhead. Busy Bee Daycare Proffer Amendment .56 33-A-93 4498 Martinsburg Pike B2(with proffers) B2(with Proffers) eric.bittner@fcva.us Ryan Spielman joseph.spielman@vdot.virginia.gov VDOT has no comments on this proposed rezoning. 4 4 548 549 550 Project Name: ________________________________________________ Acreage: ___________ PIN(s): __________________ Address (or general location): Existing Zoning District: ____________________________________________ Proposed Zoning District: ___________________________________________ Staff Name (Email Address): _________________________________________ Agency Name Completing Comments (select one): ____ Frederick Water ____ Virginia Department of Transportation ____ Winchester Regional Airport ____ Virginia Department of Health ____ Historic Resources Advisory Board ____ Frederick County (FC) Public Schools ____ FC Public Works ____ FC Inspections ____ FC Fire Marshal ____ FC Parks & Recreation ____ FC County Attorney ____ Other (Specify): ________________________ Resubmission to address comments requested? Y _____ or N _____ REQUEST FOR REZONING COMMENTS Reviewer Name (Email Address): _____________________________________________________ Review Agency Comments: *Comments that may not fit in the box should be attached to the cover sheet on agency or department letterhead. Busy Bee Daycare Proffer Amendment .56 33-A-93 4498 Martinsburg Pike B2(with proffers) B2(with Proffers) eric.bittner@fcva.us 4/15/2026. John Lee. Johnathan.Lee@fcva.us Change of use permit application needs to be applied for and obtained. New C.O will be issued upon approval of permit. 4 4 551 552 553 Planning Commission Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2026 Agenda Section: Public Hearings Title: Conditional Use Permit #02-26 for Lamar Rosenberry - (Mrs. Feltner) Attachments: PC06-03-26CUP02-26_Redacted.pdf 554 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #02-26 Lamar Rosenberry Public Garage/Automotive Repair Staff Report for the Planning Commission Prepared: April 21, 2026 Staff Contact: Amy Feltner, Planner Executive Summary: Meeting Schedule Planning Commission: June 3, 2026 Action: Pending Board of Supervisors: July 8, 2026 Action: Pending Property Information Property Identification Number (PIN) 07-6-2 Address 730 Pack Horse Road Magisterial District Gainesboro Acreage +/-9.88 Zoning & Present Land Use Zoning: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residence Adjoining Property Zoning & Present Land Use North: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential South: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential East: RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential/Vacant West : RA (Rural Areas) District Land Use: Residential Proposed Use This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a public garage for automotive repair in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. 555 Page 2 of 4 Review Agency Comments: Review Agency Comment Date Comment Summary Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) February 11, 2026 Approved – no negative impact on the transportation network. If the use increases or changes, an opportunity to review the CUP again would be necessary. Frederick-Winchester Health Department April 7, 2026 Approved – a 4-bedroom construction permit has been issued for the dwelling only. The drainfield installation should commence immediately. Frederick County (FC) Inspections February 23, 2026 Change of occupancy permit required, must meet Building Code and have accessible parking and route. FC Fire Marshal February 23, 2026 The business shall comply with the FC Fire Prevention Code. FC Public Works March 25, 2026 No comment. No proposed change to grading or to stormwater infrastructure. FC GIS February 9, 2026 No need for new road names or a separate address unless owner is requesting a separate address. Planning & Zoning: Application Proposal: This is a request for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a public garage for automotive repair in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District on +/-9.88-acres. The proposed repair garage will be operated inside an existing 28’ x 52’ area inside the existing structure (garage). The repairs and services will consist of preventive maintenance, computer diagnostics, and failed sensor/parts replacements. No engine or major automotive component overhauling will be conducted. Waste and scrap materials are stored inside the facility and recycled on a consistent basis. The hours of operation as proposed in the application are 8 a.m. – 5 p.m. Monday through Friday and by appointment only on Saturday and Sundays. The anticipated number of customers in the application are one (1) to two (2) customers daily, and 7-10 customers weekly. 556 Page 3 of 4 Staff Analysis: §165-304.02 of the Federick County Zoning Ordinance for Conditional Use Permits (CUP) states that the Planning Commission and Board shall consider the following standards when considering Conditional Use Permits: A. The conditional use shall not tend to change the character and established pattern of development of the area of the proposed use. • Public Garage is designed for use of servicing, repairing, or equipping motor vehicles. (§165-1105-04). The proposed use is permitted in the RA (Rural Area) District with an approved conditional use permit. The property is surrounded by other RA (Rural Area) zoned properties, which includes vacant agricultural and single-family detached residences. The property is zoned RA (Rural Area) and will not change the character and established development of the area. B. The conditional use shall be in harmony with and shall not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties. • The property is surrounded by other RA (Rural Area) zoned properties, which includes vacant agricultural and single-family detached residences. The proposed use will not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of the surrounding properties. C. The conditional use shall be in accord with the policies expressed in the Comprehensive Plan of the County and with the intent of this chapter. • The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area of the County as “rural” and is to remain agricultural in nature and is not part of any land use study. D. The conditional use shall not adversely affect the natural character and environment of the County. • The proposal would not adversely affect the nature and character of the environment of the County. No new structures are requested, and the operation is conducted inside an existing facility as proposed. E. The conditional use permit shall be approved only if adequate facilities, roads, safe access and drainage are provided. • The property is accessed via an existing private driveway located at 730 Pack Horse Road. F. The conditional use shall conform with all applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. • The Zoning Ordinance provides additional regulations for motor vehicle service uses, automotive repair shops, and public garages in §165-704.02. The additional regulation for specific uses is as follows: o All repairs shall take place within the enclosed structure. 557 Page 4 of 4 o All exterior storage of parts and equipment shall be screened from view of surrounding properties by an opaque fence or screen of at least six feet in height. o Inoperative vehicles shall be stored within a totally enclosed building or screened on all sides by a six-foot tall opaque element such as a fence, wall or berm. The sale of automobiles is prohibited. Staff conducted a site inspection on April 15, 2026. The parking area is currently screened on the north, east, and south side of the property with existing structures. Should the need to store vehicles in this area in the future, an opaque screening element will be provided on the western side of the parking area. The location and type of the screening will be noted on the illustrative sketch. Conditions of Approval: Should the Planning Commission find the public garage use to be appropriate, staff would suggest the following conditions for the CUP: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The required drainfield/septic approval shall be inspected and approved by Virginia Department of Health prior to the establishment of the use. 3. An illustrative sketch plan shall be submitted to and approved by Frederick County and all improvements completed prior to the establishment of the use. 4. All automotive repair related activities, including repairs, shall occur entirely within an enclosed structure. Any exterior storage of parts and equipment shall be screened from view by an opaque fence or screen at least six (6) feet in height. 5. All parking areas shall have a gravel or hard surface. 6. The business is not permitted employees beyond those residing on the property. 7. The hours of operation shall be from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. Saturday and Sunday by appointment only. 8. A maximum of three (3) vehicles awaiting service is permitted. 9. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new Conditional Use Permit. Following a public hearing, staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors on this CUP application. 558 DOUBLEHITCH LNPACKHORSE RD07 6 2 161 DOUBLE HITCH LN 140 DOUBLE HITCH LN 776 PACK HORSE RD 600 PACK HORSE RD 527 PACK HORSE RD 142 DOUBLE HITCH LN 735 PACK HORSE RD 775 PACK HORSE RD 680 PACK HORSE RD µ Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: April 16, 2026FILESCHAPEL DRDOUBLEHITCH LNSNAKE DRSHOCKEYSVILLERDPACK HORSE RD0 290 580145 Feet CUP # 02 - 26: Lamar Rosenberry PIN: 07 - 6 - 2 Repair Garage Zoning Map Application Parcels CUP #02-26 559 DOUBLEHITCH LNPACKHORSE RD07 6 2 161 DOUBLE HITCH LN 600 PACK HORSE RD 140 DOUBLE HITCH LN 776 PACK HORSE RD 680 PACK HORSE RD 142 DOUBLE HITCH LN 735 PACK HORSE RD 775 PACK HORSE RD 527 PACK HORSE RD µ Frederick County Planning & Development 107 N Kent St Winchester, VA 22601 540 - 665 - 5651 Map Created: April 16, 2026FILESCHAPEL DRDOUBLEHITCH LNSNAKE DRSHOCKEYSVILLERDPACK HORSE RD0 290 580145 Feet CUP # 02 - 26: Lamar Rosenberry PIN: 07 - 6 - 2 Repair Garage Location Map Application Parcels CUP #02-26 560 561 562 563 564 The plan is to repair automotive vehicles by appointment. Repairs will be done inside the main area of the enclosed structure. The structure is 48ftX52ft, however, the repair work will only be done in the main 28ftX52ft area. There is a dividing wall that separates the main area from a lean-to portion of the structure and that portion is 20ftX52ft and will be for personal use only. Waste and Scrap materials will be recycled on a consistent basis and or remain inside the main 28ftX52ft structure to maintain a clean and tidy exterior and interior of the facility. All inoperable vehicles that arrive will be stored inside the garage for the duration of the repairs and will be by appointment only. The repairs and services will consist of automotive preventive maintenance, computer diagnostics, and failed parts or sensor replacement. There will be no engines or major automotive components overhauled at this facility. Auto parts deliveries will happen during normal business hours with approximately 2 deliveries per day and or 12 per week depending on work load. UPS and FEDEX will also be normal delivery methods. Inoperable vehicles that arrive on light duty rollback by appointment and will be stored in the enclosed structure and during the repairs. No heavy-duty vehicles for deliveries will be needed for the repairs and services. There are vehicles and equipment on the property that are not associated with the business and are for personal use and for maintaining the farm. The arial imagery or satellite view from 2021 is not a good representation of the customer parking area orderliness that is planned. Operating a normal 8am-5pm, Monday – Friday, and or by appointment. Customers will arrive and leave from the designated parking area. 1-2 customers per day, possibly 7-10 customers per week. No employees and or hiring planned for the foreseeable future. There will be no advertising of the business or the address of the business to help maintain the ‘by appointment’ protocol. 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 Project Name:________________________________________________ Acreage (Disturbed Area Acreage): _______________________________ PIN(s): __________________ Address (or general location): Existing Zoning: ___________________________________________________ Proposed Conditional Use:___________________________________________ Staff Name (Email Address): _________________________________________ Agency Name Completing Comments (select one): ____ Frederick Water ____ Virginia Department of Transportation ____ Winchester Regional Airport ____ Virginia Department of Health ____ Historic Resources Advisory Board ____ Frederick County (FC) Public Schools ____ FC Public Works ____ FC Inspections ____ FC Fire Marshal ____ FC Parks & Recreation ____ FC County Attorney ____ Other (Specify): ________________________ Reviewer Name (Email Address): _____________________________________________________ Review Agency Comments: *Comments that may not fit in the box should be attached to the cover sheet on agency or department letterhead. Resubmission to address comments requested? Y _____ or N _____ REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) COMMENTS 574 575 576 577 Planning Commission Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2026 Agenda Section: Public Hearings Title: Draft Update of the 2026-2027 Frederick County Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Improvement Plans - (Mr. Bishop) Attachments: PC06-03-26InterstatePrimarySecondaryRoadPlans.pdf 578 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 Fax: 540/ 665-6395 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Assistant Director RE: Update of the Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Improvement Plans DATE: May 20, 2026 This is a public hearing item to consider the update of the 2026 – 2027 Interstate, Primary, and Secondary Road Improvement Plans. Summary of Changes: Interstate Plan: Update of language to note areas under study and to designate the widening segment from Exit 310 to Exit 313. Primary Plan: No changes at this time. Secondary Plan: Removal of completed road paving projects for Fishel Road and Canterburg Road. Promotion of Grace Church Road from the Unscheduled list to the Scheduled list with an anticipated date of 2031. Addition of Veterans Road and Shady Creek Road to the Unscheduled list. The Transportation Committee reviewed this item on April 27, 2026, and recommended approval. Attachments MEMORANDUM 579 2026/27-2031/32 INTERSTATE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN for FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Frederick County Transportation Committee:4/27/26 Frederick County Planning Commission: 6/3/26 Frederick County Board of Supervisors: 6/10/26 580 I-81 Improvements: Provide additional travel lanes on the main line, modifications to existing interchange areas, and develop new interchange areas and bridge crossings of the main line as recommended by the WinFred MPO Long Range Plan. All projects in the vicinity of future I-81 connections for Route 37 should be scoped to consider that project to prevent conflicting improvements and make sure to accommodate that future connection. Moreover, the County of Frederick supports exploration and expansion of the potential for freight rail transportation as a component of the Interstate 81 Corridor improvements to aid in removing more trucks from the road. Interchange Priorities 1. Exit 317 – Interchange Upgrade to Diverging Diamond and Redbud Road realignment to accommodate interchange upgrade. Improvements to bridges and the north end of the interchange should work to accommodate the future Route 37 north connection. 2. Exit 307 – Bridge replacement and widening as well as ramp upgrades to existing facility while continuing to promote the future relocation further south to the South Frederick Parkway. 3. Exit 313 - Bridge reconstruction, safety improvements, and capacity expansion. 4. Exit 323 – Interchange Upgrade – Currently under MPO study. 5. Exit 310 - Phase 2 of the FHWA approved interchange modifications. 6. Exit 307 – Interchange Relocation. 7. Exit 321 – Upgrade to split interchange between Hopewell Rd and Cedar Hill Rd – Currently under MPO study. Interstate Widening Priorities 1. Widen I-81 from mile marker 312.2 to mile marker 318.8. Note: This project is funded via the I-81 fund. 2. Widen I-81 from Exit 310 to mile marker 312.2 Note: This project is funded via the I-81 fund. 3. Widen I-81 from Route 277 Exit 307 to Route 37 Exit 310. This should include the relocation of Exit 307. 4. Widen I-81 in Frederick County from .5 Miles north of Route 11 Exit 317 to the West Virginia State line. 581 5. Widen I-81 in Frederick County from Route 277 Exit 307 to the Warren County Line in the South. Intelligent Transportation Systems and Incident Management 1. Increase of VDOT safety patrols. 2. Implement more variable message signs along the I-81 corridor and approaches. 582 ¬«7 ¬«277 ¬«37 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦66 §¨¦81 £¤11 £¤50 £¤522 £¤11 £¤11 £¤522 £¤50 £¤11 £¤522 £¤522 £¤522 £¤50 £¤11 Winchester StephensCity Middletown 0 2.5 51.25 Miles 2026 - 2027InterstateRoadImprovementPlan µ Widening Priorities Widen Remainder of I-81 NorthPriority 4 Widen Remainder of I-81 SouthPriority 5 Priority 1Widen I-81 from Exit 313to 0.5 Miles North of Exit 317Priority 2Widen I-81 fromExit 310 to Exit 313Priority 3Widen I-81 fromExit 307 to Exit 310 InterchangeImprovement Priorities Priority 4 !(Exit 323 Interchange Upgrade Exit 310 Phase II of theInterchange Upgrade Priority 5 !( Exit 321 Upgrade to SplitInterchange Priority 7 !( Exit 307 Ramp Relocation Priority 6 !( Exit 313 Bridge Reconstruction,Safety Improvements, andCapacity Expansion Priority 3 !( Priority 2 !(Exit 307 Safety and CapacityImprovements to Existing Locationand Promote Future Realignment Priority 1 !(Exit 317 Interchange Upgradeand Redbud Rd Realignment toAccomodate InterchangeUpgrade 583 2026/27-2031/32 PRIMARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN for FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Frederick County Transportation Committee: 4/27/26 Frederick County Planning Commission: 6/3/26 Frederick County Board of Supervisors: 6/10/26 584 All upgrades to primary system roadways that are not limited access should include implementation of access management principles to improve safety and efficiency wherever possible. 1) Route 37 Bypass (Phase 1 and 2) In 2024 the County completed the Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study (EFTCS) which took an in-depth look at the feasibility, phasing, and best mode of implementation of Route 37. Results of that analysis were used to update the phasing priorities and what form initial construction of early phases should take. In Phase 1 and 2 a limited access Parkway style roadway is recommended. Phases 3,4, and 5 do not generate sufficient additional traffic for implementation prior to 2050 based upon modeling results at this time so additional detail for initial phasing of those segments is not included at this time, but interim improvements are noted where applicable. A. Route 37 – Phase 1 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between existing Route 11 North and Route 7 after completion of VDOT required new road on new location analysis. Per the EFCTS an initial development of this project would be a limited access parkway concept starting with 2 lanes of the ultimate 4 lanes from Route 11 North to Route 7. B. Route 37 - Phase 2 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the southern segment of the Route 37 Eastern Bypass from Interstate I- 81 to Front Royal Pike (Route 522 South) after completion of VDOT required new road on new location analysis. Per the Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study (EFCTS) an initial development of this project would be a limited access parkway concept with 4 lanes from existing 37 at Exit 310 to future Warrior Drive and 2 lanes of the ultimate 4 lanes from future Warrior Drive and Route 522. 2) Route 11 (North and South of Winchester) A) Upgrade to Six Through Lane System: From: Northern limits of the City of Winchester To: Intersection of Cedar Hill Road B) Upgrade to Four Through Lane System: From: Southern limits of the City of Winchester To: Renaissance Drive C) Upgrade to Four Through Lane System: From: Intersection of Cedar Hill Road To: West Virginia line 585 3) Route 277 (East of Stephens City) Upgrade of the overall corridor to a 4-lane system with improved access management and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A) Establish an Urban Divided Four Lane System: From: Double Church Road To: Warrior Drive B) Upgrade to a Four Through Lane System: From: Warrior Drive To: White Oak Road C) Upgrade to a Four Through Lane System: From: White Oak Road To: Route 522 4) Route 7 – Establish a 6 Through Lane Cross Section: From: Exit 315 Interchange To: Future Route 37 Interchange 5) Route 50 East and West A) Upgrade Interchange at Route 50 and Route 37 to a Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) B) Safety Upgrades to Intersections at Back Mountain Road, Hayfield Road, Wardensville Grade, Stony Hill Road, and Dicks Hollow Road C) Establish a 6 Through Lane Cross Section: From: The Interchange at Exit 313 To: The Future Route 37 Interchange D) Establish a 6 Through Lane Cross Section: From: The Interchange with Route 37 To: Poorhouse Road 586 6) Route 37 Phases 3, 4, and 5 In 2024 the County completed the Eastern Frederick County Transportation Study (EFTCS) which took an in-depth look at the feasibility, phasing, and best mode of implementation of Route 37. Results of that analysis were used to update the phasing priorities and what form initial construction of early phases should take. Phases 3, 4, and 5 do not generate sufficient additional traffic for implementation prior to 2050 based upon modeling results at this time so additional detail for initial phasing of those segments is not included at this time, but interim improvements are noted where applicable. A) Route 37 – Phase 3 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between Existing Route 50/17 and Route 522. As noted in the EFTCS study, the Comprehensive Planned Justes Drive Extension to Airport Road will likely serve as an important interim improvement prior to this connection. B) Route 37 - Phase 4 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between Route 7 and Route 50/17. Extension of Hallowed Crossing Way (formerly Haggerty Blvd) to Senseny Road would likely serve as an important interim improvement prior to this connection. C) Route 37 – Phase 5 Initiate final engineering and design, acquire right-of-way, and establish a construction phase schedule for the preferred alternative between Existing Route 37 around Stonewall Industrial Park to Route 11 North. 7) South Frederick County Parkway: From: Relocated Exit 307 To: Intersection with Route 277 approximately 1 mile west of the intersection of Route 277 and Route 522 This long term planned roadway has limited access points serving a mixture of predominantly commercial and industrial development. There is a need to study this project in conjunction with the Exit 307 relocation and planning for Route 277 improvements noted in item 3. Phasing of this project is not yet clearly defined; however general phasing would be from West to East with the clear first phase being from relocated Exit 307 to Warrior Drive. 8) Route 522 and Costello Drive Add additional left turn lane capacity on Route 522 southbound for turns onto Costello Drive. 587 9) Gateway Drive Extension and Intersection with Valley Mill Road This project will establish an intersection on Valley Mill Road and connection to Gateway Drive approximately 150 to the south of the new intersection with the remainder of the Gateway Drive extension to be constructed by development via proffer. 10) Route 37 Slip Ramps to Lenoir Drive Construct ramps to allow traffic to enter and exit the southbound side of Route 37 from Lenoir Drive. 11) Commuter Park and Ride Lots Determine appropriate locations for park and ride facilities at other strategic locations within the County’s Urban Development Area. For Park and Ride locations in Frederick County, the primary goal should be that they are situated in such a manner that they reduce traffic in Frederick County in addition to adjacent localities and ideally strengthen SmartScale applications. 588 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦66 ¬«277 ¬«277 ¬«127 ¬«7 ¬«7 ¬«37 £¤50 £¤522 £¤522 £¤50 £¤522 £¤11 £¤11 £¤522£¤50 £¤50 £¤11 £¤522 £¤522 £¤11 Winchester Stephens City Middletown 2026 - 2027Primary RoadImprovementPlan 0 1 20.5 Miles Route 37 Bypass (Phase 1 & 2) Priority 1A - Phase 1 Priority 1B - Phase 2 Route 11 North & South Priority 2A Priority 2B Priority 2C Route 277 East of Stephens City Priority 3A Priority 3B Priority 3C Route 7 Priority 4 Route 50 !(Priority 5A !(Priority 5B Priority 5C Priority 5D Route 37 Bypass (Phases 3, 4, & 5) Priority 6A - Phase 3 Priority 6B - Phase 4 Priority 6C - Phase 5 South Frederick County Parkway Priority 7 Route 522 & Costello Dr !(Priority 8 Gateway Drive Extension Priority 9 Lenoir Drive/Route 37 Slip Ramps Priority 10 Commuter - Park & Ride Lots !(Priority 11µ 2A 2C 2B 3A 3B 3C 4 5C 5D 1A 1B 6A 6B 6C 7 9 10 589 2026/27-2031/32 SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN for FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA Frederick County Transportation Committee: 4/27/26 Frederick County Planning Commission: 6/3/26 Frederick County Board of Supervisors:6/10/26 590 MAJOR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 2026/2027 through 2031/2032 Major road improvement projects command the reconstruction of hardsurfaced roads to enhance public safety. Improvements required for road width, road alignment, road strength, and road gradient are considered major road improvements projects. ROUTE ROAD NAME FROM TO AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT DISTANCE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ESTIMATED COST ADVERTISEMENT DATE COMMENTS 661 Red Bud Road .47 Mi South Route 11 Int. Snowden Bridge Blvd. 2000 0.5 miles ST $6,497,399 2025 R/S Funds 591 ¬«37 ¬«7 ¬«7 ¬«277 ¬«7 ¬«37 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 £¤11 £¤50 £¤11 £¤11 £¤50 £¤522 £¤522 Winchester Stephens City Frederick CountyMajor RoadImprovement Projects2026/2027 thru 2031/2032 0 1 20.5 Milesµ 1 1. Redbud Rd Realignment 592 NON-HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 2026/2027 through 2031/2032 Non-Hardsurface road improvement projects provide impervious resurfacing and reconstruction of non-hardsurfaced secondary roads. Non-Hardsurface improvement projects are prioritized by an objective rating system, which considers average daily traffic volumes; occupied structures; physical road conditions including geometrics, drainage, and accident reports; school bus routing; and the time that project requests have been on the Secondary Road Improvement Plan. RANK ROUTE ROAD NAME FROM TO AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT DISTANCE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ESTIMATED COST ADVERTISEMENT DATE COMMENTS** 1 638 Clark Road 625 759 140 .8 mile BC $331,000 2026 District Grant Unpaved Road 2 696 S. Timber Ridge Road 522 694 220 1.3 Miles GA $570,000 2027 District Grant Unpaved Road 3 607 Heishman Road 600 End of Maint. 60 0.78 BC $350,000 2027 District Grant Unpaved Road 4 682 Glaize Orchard Road 608 654 240 1.54 GA $700,000 2028 District Grant Unpaved Road 5 670 Ruebuck Lane 669 End of Maint. 160 0.35 ST $192,000 2029 District Grant Unpaved Road 6 608 Hunting Ridge Road Phase I 682 End of Paving 90 1.00 GA $485,963 2029 District Grant Unpaved Road 7 608 Hunting Ridge Road Phase II End of Paving 681 90 1.44 GA $689,000 2030 District Grant Unpaved Road 8 668 Grace Church Road 667 671 210 1.35 ST $650,000 2031 District Grant Unpaved Road *NOTE: Projects are placed on the scheduled list based upon VDOT revenue projections. Changes to those projections can lead to projects being delayed or removed from the scheduled list. **NOTE: Projects primarily funded via District Grant Unpaved Road funds which are distributed to localities on a formula bas is by the state. The formula is based upon miles of unpaved roads in the County compared to miles of unpaved roads in counties acr oss the state and available funds for use on unpaved roads. Due to the volatility of cost estimates, when projected cost estimat es compared to unpaved roads actual cost lead to a shortfall, this is sometimes addressed using telefee funds allocated to the County. 593 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦66 ¬«55 ¬«259 ¬«277 ¬«127 ¬«7 ¬«37 £¤50 £¤522 £¤522 £¤522 £¤11 £¤50 £¤50 £¤11 £¤522 £¤11 £¤522 Winchester Stephens City Middletown Frederick CountyNon-Hardsurfaced RoadImprovement Projects2026/2027 thru 2031/2032 µ0 4 82 Mil es 1. Clark R d 2. South Timber Ridge Rd 3. Heishman Ln 4. Glaize Orchard Rd 5. Ruebuck R d 6. Hunting Ridge Rd Phase I 7. Hunting Ridge Rd Phase II 8. Grace Church Rd 1 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 594 UNSCHEDULED NON-HARDSURFACE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS 2026/2027 through 2031/2032 RANK ROAD NAME ROUTE FROM TO AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT DISTANCE (MILES) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT RATING COMMENTS 1 Cougill Rd 634 635 11 120 0.25 BC 61.00 2 Huttle Rd 636 709 735 160 1.1 OP 60.05 3 Light Rd 685 600 681 40 1.3 GA 58.46 4 Cattail Rd 731 608 654 100 1.7 GA 58.24 5 McDonald Rd 616 608 .44 N. of 608 90 0.45 BC 54.33 6 Shockeysville Rd 671 690 .90 miles west of 690 80 0.9 GA 53.67 7 Mount Olive Rd 615 50 Hammack Lane 120 0.37 BC 52.00 8 Gardners Rd 700 127 701 80 1 GA 51.50 9 Mt. Williams Ln 612 608 End of maintenance 60 1.0 BC 44.00 10 Knob Rd 752 Route 50 705 60 2.7 BC 43.40 11 New Hope Rd 699 522 Timber Ridge School 40 2.35 GA 42.44 12 Mount Olive Rd 615 Hammack Lane 600 120 0.4 BC 41.00 13 Passage Ln 648 631 649 192 1.35 BC TBD 14 Germany Rd 625 631 628 136 2.15 BC TBD 15 Veterans Rd 625 627 Fourth St. 180 0.52 BC TBD 16 Shady Creek Rd 668 667 Sister Chipmunk Ln 170 0.75 ST TBD Note: Project ratings are updated only when funding is available to promote projects to the scheduled list. *Indicated that a roadway doesn’t currently have sufficient traffic count to qualify for state funds. Trips will have to increase to 50 per day prior to state funds being allocated. 595 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦81 §¨¦66 ¬«55 ¬«259 ¬«277 ¬«127 ¬«7 ¬«37 £¤50 £¤522 £¤522 £¤522 £¤11 £¤50 £¤50 £¤522 £¤11 £¤522 Winchester Stephens City Frederick CountyUnscheduledNon-Hardsurfaced RoadImprovement Projects2026/2027 thru 2031/2032 µ0 4 82 Miles 1. Coug ill Rd 2. Huttle Rd 3. Lig ht Rd 4. Catta il Rd 5. McDonald R d 6. Shockeysville Rd 7. Mount O live Rd 8. Ga rd ners R d 9. Mount W illiams L n 10. Knob Rd 11. New Hop e R d 12. Moun t Olive R d 13. Passage Ln 14. G erma ny Rd 15. Vete rans R d 16. Shad y Creek Rd 14 13 16 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 9 11 3 Middletown15 596 Secondary System Frederick County Fund FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 Total CTB Formula - Unpaved State $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Formula Secondary State $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TeleFee $233,243 $233,243 $233,243 $233,243 $233,243 $233,243 $1,399,458 STP Converted from IM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal STP - Bond Match $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Formula STP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MG Formula $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 BR Formula $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 State Funds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal STP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 District Grant - Unpaved $573,032 $573,032 $573,032 $568,931 $568,931 $538,739 $3,395,697 Total $806,275 $806,275 $806,275 $802,174 $802,174 $771,982 $4,795,155 Construction Program Estimated Allocations Board Approval Date: Residency Administrator County Administrator Date Date 597 Budget Detail Report SSYP FY27 (working draft) : FY27 WORKING Frederick County Frederick County (034) UPC Description 59259 RTE 655 - RECONSTRUCTION 0001.00 Project 0655034274 0.691 Mi. W. Rte 656 0.288 Mi. E. Rte 656 Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $0 ProjectedPrevious $6,343,821 $0 $6,343,821 $5,473,750 -$870,071 06/04/07 09/11/12 11/06/18 $1,243,898 $789,997 $3,439,855 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030601 .Formula - Secondary :Federal/State - Frederick (CNS601) $324 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $535 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030626 Secondary Formula - IM to STP : Frederick (CNF626) $167 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030653 Federal Formula - Secondary Bond Match : Frederick (CNB653) $660 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030667 Secondary Formula - STP : Frederick (CNF667) $128 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030668 Secondary Formula - EB(MG) : Frederick (CNF668) $239 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030669 Secondary Formula - Bridge : Frederick (CNF669) $300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030670 Secondary Formula - Match : Frederick (CNB670) $437 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030675 Federal Formula STP - Secondary : Frederick (CNF675) $3,554 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 101435 Relocate Rt.661 Red Bud Road 0002.01 Project 0661034801 0.600 Miles West of Snowden Bridge Blvd. 0.214 Miles West of Snowden Bridge Blvd. Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $153,364 ProjectedPrevious $5,834,782 $0 $5,988,146 $6,497,399 $509,253 01/07/15 06/10/25 03/10/26 $1,264,275 $255,198 $4,977,926 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 3001500 CTB Formula: Unpaved - Frederick $83 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030201 Revenue Sharing Funds :Local Match $1,787 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030202 Revenue Sharing Funds :State Match (CNS202) $1,787 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $1,329 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6030672 Secondary Formula - State : Frederick (CNS672) $435 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $0 $153 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 9030622 Accounts Receivable - Secondary $415 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Staunton 3/27/2026 10:26:13 AM 1 of 3 598 Budget Detail Report SSYP FY27 (working draft) : FY27 WORKING Frederick County Frederick County (034) UPC Description 115231 Fishel Road - Rural Rustic - Frederick County 0003.16 Project 0612034923 Rt. 600 - Back Mountain Road Rt. 600 - Back Mountain Road Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $0 ProjectedPrevious $630,000 $0 $630,000 $630,000 $0 03/31/25 $0 $0 $630,000 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $630 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 115232 Canterburg Road - Rural Rustic - Frederick County 0003.17 Project 0636034924 Rt. 640 - Refuge Church Road Rt. 641 - Double Church Road Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $0 ProjectedPrevious $408,586 $0 $408,586 $408,586 $0 12/05/25 $0 $0 $408,586 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $63 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $346 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 124889 Rte. 638 Clark Road - Rural Rustic 0003.18 Project 0638034938 Various Various Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $124,586 ProjectedPrevious $206,414 $0 $331,000 $331,000 $0 12/01/25 $0 $0 $331,000 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $181 $125 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 121193 FY27 & FY28 Frederick County Rural Rustic Roads Projects 0003.19 Project 9999034953 various various Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $295,082 ProjectedPrevious $0 $624,918 $920,000 $920,000 $0 09/23/26 $0 $0 $920,000 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $0 $0 $128 $0 $0 $0 $0 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $0 $295 $497 $0 $0 $0 $0 3/27/2026 10:26:13 AM 2 of 3 599 Budget Detail Report SSYP FY27 (working draft) : FY27 WORKING Frederick County Frederick County (034) UPC Description 124890 FY29 & FY30 FREDERICK COUNTY RURAL RUSTIC ROADS PROJECTS 0003.20 Project 9999034960 Various Various Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $0 ProjectedPrevious $0 $1,377,963 $1,377,963 $1,377,963 $0 03/27/28 $0 $0 $1,377,963 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $0 $0 $0 $136 $24 $0 $0 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $0 $0 $76 $573 $569 $0 $0 127181 FY31 FREDERICK COUNTY RURAL RUSTIC ROADS PROJECTS 0003.21 Project 9999034977 Various Various Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $0 ProjectedPrevious $0 $689,000 $689,000 $689,000 $0 02/25/30 $0 $0 $689,000 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $140 $0 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $499 $0 -31667 FY32 FREDERICK COUNTY RURAL RUSTIC ROADS PROJECTS 0003.22 Project 9999034992 Various Various Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $0 ProjectedPrevious $0 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 $650,000 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8 $33 6071700 HB2 DG: Unpaved - Frederick $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $70 $539 122228 COUNTYWIDE - TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 0004.01 Project 9999034 Total Estimate: Balance: Budget $233,243 ProjectedPrevious $1,061,295 $646,999 $1,941,537 $1,440,823 -$500,714 07/01/22 06/30/23 07/01/24 $50,000 $50,000 $1,340,823 Schedule: Total Estimate: PE RW CN Funding Detail (in $1000s)Previous FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 6030606 Secondary Formula - Telecommunications : Frederick $1,061 $233 $105 $97 $160 $85 $200 3/27/2026 10:26:13 AM 3 of 3 600 Planning Commission Agenda Item Detail Meeting Date: June 3, 2026 Agenda Section: Other Title: Current Planning Applications Attachments: 601