Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06 Traffic Impact AnalysisA Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Located in: Frederick County, Virginia Prepared for: Carriage Park LLC 2022 Meadow Springs Drive Vienna, Virginia 22182 Prepared by: Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc End nees. Surveyors. Ranners. Lcndsccpe M chi test ort e. T T Martins300 Foxcrburg. f Avenu West Virginia 254 01 �L T 304.264.2711 F 3C4.264.3671 May 06, 2005 OVERVIEW Report Summary Methodology EXISTING CONDITIONS Patton Harris Rust Associates, pc (PHR +A) has prepared this document to present the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development to be located along the south side of Route 7 (Berryville Pike), east of Route 660 (Woods Mill Road) in Frederick County, Virginia. The proposed project is to include 94 townhouses and 53 single family detached residential units with access to be provided via a single site driveway (right -in and right-out) along Route 7. The proposed development will be built out over a single transportation phase by the year 2007. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of the proposed Carriage Park development with respect to the surrounding roadway network. The traffic impacts accompanying the Carriage Park development were obtained through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document: Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of impact, Calculation of trip generation for the proposed Carriage Park development, Distribution and assignment of the Carriage Park generated trips onto the completed roadway network, Analysis of capacity and level of service using the latest version of the highway capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions. PHR +A conducted AM and PM peak hour manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Route 7 /Route 660 and Route 7 /Route 659 (Valley Mill Road). In order to demonstrate worst -case conditions, the existing traffic volumes were then balanced between the two intersections. Additionally, PHR +A conducted the eastbound U -turn counts at the intersection of Route 7/Woods Mill Road since planned improvements would require this movement to be diverted to the Route 7 /Valley Mill Road intersection in the future. ADT (Average Daily Traffic) were established along each of the study area roadway Links using a "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24 -hour traffic volumes) of 8.0% as determined from traffic count data provided by Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM /PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersections of Route 7 /Route 660 and Route 7 /Route 659. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry and AM /PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 1 No Scale -P F igure t St tro p Y'T" 1 Y i LP l r r e x ka a�Y a,?'fr F �i� 6 k t^f >ib��:. S+' "'wi*a r>3 0'• `t :'r s•' a d t'''" +Y ��j ��y Rf, 7 "66 �g �t�l ,y �"fr�4d.17 y h �r 6^if.• y!.,��t 3f1. £,£�',FS'��EgdSY'e F P 4yy'i��„��'Y�#'. Li T`, v h� ,1. �{w, .4 Sf'3� s t G 'V.xjy w r E i 4 vs' �xs,vE'� 3P r..r s" 3 F �'e 3'4 RS�X� `M 'm 17(6 4 x'Ft Y IP (T IRtla L•�hC '4 e v f r Y. c� t Y y, 'v.'l U it4a 4 �a ISI T� Y f{ LS t�r �yP "f k Y 6 7 Y '�,Ti.���y Y ,S "'F XSFY Y���•� r a .d"{. ^3 y t rY �k' m X .tt �1'�{��.. N ^i F�c§ C b"•, P r�}""�' "•b� a: s ""F �"�t s+ G S'� k R`. k t..: �F.»c�+-*�z'�'.'�`D�a� 1 Vicinity Map: Carriage Park in Frederick County, Virginia P A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 2 PHI--A F igure 2 P No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) AveragelDatlyiTfips Existing Traffic Conditions A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 135541-0 May 06, 2005 Page 3 No Scale 0 m a Unsignalized ®k Intersection 1 Q I 1 I SITE a >r(C)C� �2'J* Unsignalized Intersection Denotes stop sign control Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) P r Figure 3 P Existing Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 4 Code band Use Amount In AM Peak Hour Out Total In PM Peak Hour Out Total ADT Red -Bud Run 210 Single Family Detached 300 units 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 Total 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 Toll Borthers- Eddy's Lane 210 Single Fancily Detached 80 units 16 49 65 55 32 88 800 Total 16 49 65 55 32 88 800 Other Developments along Charming Drive 210 Single Family Detached 300 units 55 165 219 182 107 288 3,000 230 Townhouse/Condo 130 units 11 53 64 50 25 75 1,131 820 Retail 120,000 SF 107 68 175 339 367 706 7,645 Total 172 286 458 570 498 1,069 11,776 Fieldstone Development 210 Single Family Detached 63 units 13 40 54 45 26 71 630 230 Townhouse/Condo 207 units 16 77 92 73 36 109 1,801 Total 29 117 146 118 62 180 2,431 Chadwell Property 210 Single Fancily Detached 30 units 8 23 30 23 13 36 300 Total 8 23 30 23 13 36 300 Haggerty Property 210 Single Family Detached 180 units 34 102 135 115 67 182 1,800 220 Apartment 60 units 7 27 33 33 18 51 511 230 Townhouse/Condo 60 units 6 28 34 26 13 40 522 Total 46 157 203 174 98 272 2,833 2007 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS In order to estimate the future growth rates and incorporate trips associated with specific "other developments" located within the vicinity of the proposed site, PHR +A utilized the following report: A Traffic hnpact Analysis of the Haggerty Property, by PHR +A, dated September 22, 2004. PHR +A applied an annual growth rate of five percent (5 to the existing traffic volumes (shown in Figure 2) to obtain the 2007 base conditions. Based upon the 7 Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report PHR +A has provided Table 1 to summarize the trip generation for the "other developments" surrounding the site. Figure 4 shows the 2007 background ADT and AM /PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the study area. Figure 5 shows the respective 2007 background lane geometry and AM /PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. Table 1 "Other Developments" Trip Generation Summar P A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 5 PHRA 4 P ti No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) ;ti* DailyTrij 2007 Background Traffic Conditions A Traffic impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 6 No Scale 0 O WM tad! Unsignalized Intersection Signalized) Suggested Inle'sedlon Improvement" I:OS =B(C)] Signalization Se 11,eft EB 1 Right t 1 v, SITE L b 6 (Slgnalizeil3 "Suggested Intersection Improvement" eOS?B(C) Signalization Unsignalized Intersection c ue Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) P F Figure 5 P 2007 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 7 Code Laud Use Amount In AM Peak Hour Out Total In PM Peak Hour Out Total ADT Carriage Park 210 Single Family Detached 53 units 12 35 47 38 22 61 530 230 Townhouse/Condo 94 units 8 41 49 38 19 57 818 Total 20 76 96 76 41 118 1,348 TRIP GENERATION Using the 7th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Report, PHR +A has prepared Table 2 to summarize the trip generation for the proposed Carriage Park development. Table 2 Proposed Development: Carriage Park Trip Generation Summar TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT The distribution of trips, shown in Figure 6, was based upon local travel patterns for the roadway network surrounding the proposed Carriage Park development. Figure 7 shows the respective development- generated AM /PM peak hour trips and ADT assignments at key locations through out the study area. 2007 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS Carriage Park assigned trips (Figure 7) were added to the 2007 background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2007 build -out conditions. Figure 8 shows the 2007 build out ADT and AM /PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations through out the study area. Figure 9 shows the respective 2007 build -out lane geometry and AM /PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report. CONCLUSION The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Carriage Park development, assuming suggested improvements, are acceptable and manageable. Assuming planned study area intersection improvements, each of the intersections will operate with levels of service "C" or better during 2007 build -out conditions. P H RA A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriaee Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 8 P Trip Distribution Percentages A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 9 No Scale AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) ;��A "verage�Daily�Tr ip s _pHRA Figure 7 P Trip Assignments A Tragic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 10 No Scale 44,4 1 2 x (1 4 1) Figure 8 P 37 (17 2) 1 140 (2172) 8 (31) 401211185(2374) (1277)1516 ro (76)20 Q %JO (€14), fie I f SITE 2007 Build -out Traffic Conditions /i i 0 �PJ 9 pi 4 Azt 05,16 0 er t C24 J AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) verage:DailyyATiips A Traffic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 1 0 May 06, 2005 Page 1 1 No Scale (F)Ea Unsignalized Intersection P Figure 9 P !Intersecllon COs -1140 SITE "Suggested Improvement" Signalivation SB ILeft EB 1 Right A gsignelltedl "Su !Intersection Improvement" "I:OS B(C) Signalization 5 W 2007 Build -out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service ©40%. a .04 e ck- Unsignalized Intersection Denotes stop sign control Denotes traffic signal control Denotes Unsignalized Critical Movement AM Peak Hour (PM Peak Hour) A Tragic Impact Analysis of Carriage Park Project Number: 13554 -1 -0 May 06, 2005 Page 12 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS and LEVEL OF' SERVICE The most current analysis methodologies used for evaluating the capacity of intersections were developed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and other members of the transportation profession. This methodology is represented in TRB Special Report Number 209, The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Computerized methods for conducting these analyses were developed by FHWA; and are the methods used in this report. The following brief explanations of the methodologies are adapted from the 1-ICM. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS TWSC At an unsignalized two -way stop controlled (TWSC) intersection, the major street has continuous right of way while the side street is controlled by a stop sign or yield sign. In operation, vehicles exiting the side street and crossing or turning into the main street flow must wait for "acceptable gaps" in the main street flow. The same is true of left- turning traffic from the main street that must cross the opposing flow. The analysis takes into account the probability of a gap in the main street traffic. The probability and number of acceptable gaps is lower in higher volume flows. The acceptability of a gap is modified by physical factors (sight distance, turning radius, etc.) and by characteristics of the traffic flow (percentage trucks, buses, etc.). In the analysis in these reports, all default values suggested by the HCM were used unless additional information was available. These defaults include the estimated percentage of trucks (single unit and tractor trailer), buses and motorcycles. The level of service for TWSC intersections is determined only for individual movements not for the intersection as a whole. The total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line; this time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last -in -queue position to the first -in- queue position. en.� c& m Levelwf Ser�vtce "Crtto e i `fl "Level AveragefTot J Dela Vt( %Jeh) 0raid! <15 V t a 1t5and <2g 25,and6 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AWSC At an unsignalized all -way stop controlled (AWSC) intersection, all directions are controlled by a stop sign. Operation of AWSC intersections requires that every vehicle stop at the intersection before proceeding. Since each driver is required to stop, the judgment as to whether to proceed into the intersection is a function of the traffic conditions on the other (opposing and conflicting) approaches. Therefore', a driver proceeds only after determining that there are no vehicles currently in the intersection and that it is safe to proceed. The analysis takes into account the problem of determining, under capacity conditions for a given approach, the factors that influence the rate at which vehicles can depart successfully from the STOP line. Traffic at other approaches, which increases potential conflict, translates directly into longer driver decision times and saturation headways. The saturation headways are also influenced by characteristics of the traffic flow (slow accelerating vehicles, left turns, etc.). In the analysis in this reports, all default values suggested by the HCM were used unless additional information was available. These defaults include the estimated percentage of trucks (single unit and tractor- trailer), buses and motorcycles. The level of service for AWSC intersections is determined only for individual movements not for the intersection as a whole. The total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line; this time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last -in -queue position to the first -in- queue position. iLevellofaSer ice Cntecia A SC Intersection Average Tote1ay evekofeSenvtce a t�. (sec /veakDh) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS The operation (and therefore the capacity) of a signalized intersection is complicated by the fact that the signal is allocating time between conflicting traffic movements movements that must use the same physical space. The analysis, therefore, must not only look at the physical geometry of the intersection, but the signal timing aspects as well. In the analysis of signalized intersections, two terms are important: volume to capacity ratio (v /c) and; average stopped delay (seconds per vehicle). The theoretical capacity is based on the physical geometry, the available green time (often expressed as G /C), and the traffic mix (e.g. trucks use more capacity than cars). The average stopped delay may be calculated from the v/c ratio, cycle length, quality of progression on the arterial and available green time on each approach. In this report all the default values recommended by the HCM are used unless other specific information is available (percentage of trucks, pedestrians, etc.). Existing signal timings are observed and used whenever possible. When future signals are being evaluated, an "optional" signal timing is calculated based on projected volumes. The level of service is based on the calculated average delay per vehicle for each approach and for the intersection as a whole. Based on extensive research studies, the maximum delay acceptable by the average driver is sixty seconds per vehicle at a signalized intersection. This is defined as the upper limit on the possible range of delay /level of service criteria. The following criteria describe the full range of level of service: >ma. eve1 ofiSe vice Eevel ofiOSer ice p. t- ritertaffor Signalized''Intersebtions t V 10.Otand <201 C 20 0 and �<,3,5.0 D >3 a E xl 4 lr >SS O ant 580 0 >80 i a Stopped Delay per Uehicle(sec) LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Service Description II C D E F A Level of Service A describes operations with very low delay, up to 10 sec per vehicle. This level of service 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. Level of Service B describes operations with delay greater than 10 and up to 20 sec per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. Level Of Service C describes operations with delay greater than 20 and up to 35 sec per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass though the intersection without stopping. Level of Service D describes operations with delay greater than 35 and up to 55 sec per vehicle. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, longer cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. Level of Service E describes operations with delay greater than 55 and up to 80 sec per vehicle. This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Level of Service F describes operations with delay in excess of 80 sec per vehicle. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over saturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 660 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Year 2007 Buildout Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour general Information Project Description Carriage Park Development Site Information East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY North /South Street: Route 660 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, P Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal `iinor Street ovement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Eastbound L 235 0.95 247 6 Raised curb 1 L 7 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95 "ontrol Delay (s /veh) bS EB 1 L 247 174 1.42 15.21 268.8 F 2 T 1280 0.95 1347 2 T 0 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 WB 4 LT 32 487 0.07 0.21 12.9 8 3 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Northbound 9 R 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 0 Northbound 7 8 Westbound 4 L 31 0.95 32 6 0 LT Southbound 10 L 43 0.95 45 6 0 9 5 T 2172 0.95 2286 2 0 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 LR 10 6 R 172 0.95 181 0 0 TR 12 R 131 0.95 137 6 0 0 0 Southbound 11 LR 182 12 Patton Harris Rust Associates LApproach delay (s/veh) 'pproach LOS HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT .eneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/5/2005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Woods Mill Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Carriage Park Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lane group L T LT R L R Volume, V (vph) 150 1401 8 1140 37 127 152 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 iitial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 45 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 120 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 55.0 G= G= G= G= 25.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 158 1475 1208 39 134 113 Lane group capacity, c 191 2086 1967 1524 473 423 v/c ratio, X 0.83 0.71 0.61 0.03 0.28 0.27 Total green ratio, g/C 0.61 0.61 0.61 1.00 0.28 0.28 Uniform delay, d 13.8 120 10.9 0.0 25.5 25.4 .i >.rogression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.950 1.000 1.000 Patton Harris Rust Associates .Delay calibration, k 0.37 0.27 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 delay, d 25.0 1.1 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 38.7 13.1 11.5 0.0 25.8 25.7 Lane group LOS D B 8 A C C Approach delay 15 6 11.1 25.8 Approach LOS B 8 C Intersection delay 14.6 X 0.66 Intersection LOS B Patton Harris Rust Associates iCS2000 Copyright 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e HCS2000'° DETAILED REPORT eneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/5/2005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Woods Mill Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Project ID Carriage Park Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lane group L T LT R L R Volume, V (vph) 235 1280 31 2172 172 43 131 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start- up.lost time, 1 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2. 0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 45 Lane width 12.0 120 12.0 12.0 12.0 120 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 6.0 G= 66.0 G= G= G= 8.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 247 1347 2319 181 45 91 Lane group capacity, c 194 2730 2274 1338 151 322 v/c ratio, X 1.27 0.49 1.02 0.14 0.30 0.28 Total green ratio, g/C 0.80 0.80 0.73 0.88 0.09 0.21 'Jniform delay, d 30.1 3.0 120 0.8 38.4 29.8 factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Patton Harris Rust Associates .Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 ncremental delay, d 156.8 0.1 24.0 0.0 1.1 0.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 186.9 3.1 36.0 0.8 39.5 30.3 Lane group LOS F A D A D C Approach delay 31 6 33.5 33.3 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 32.8 X 1.48 Intersection LOS C HCS2000 Patton Harris Rust Associates Copyright 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 Intersection: E -W: ROUTE 7 Weather Dry File Input Name N -S: ROUTE 659 Count By UP 13)11.1P Location WINCHESTER, VA Count Date 3/30/2005 15 Minute EB: ROUTE7 WB: ROUTE7 NB: ROUTE659 813: 15 Min. Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:00 270 1 271 3 144 0 147 2 11 13 0 0 431 7:00 7:15 275 0 275 2 156 0 158 3 9 12 0 0 445 7:15 7:30 269 1 270 5 163 0 168 6 14 20 0 0 458 7:30 7:45 288 3 291 7 178 0 185 9 12 21 0 0 497 7:45 8:00 290 2 292 6 187 0 193 7 7 14 0 0 499 8:00 8:15 277 1 278 5 190 0 195 5 12 17 0 0 490 8:15 8:30 276 2 278 3 196 0 199 3 14 17 0 0 494 8:30 8:45 260 2 262 5 187 0 192 5 9 14 0 0 468 8:45 A.M. Total 2205 12 2217 36 1401 0 1437 40 0 88 128 0 0 0 0 3782 A.M. Total 16:00 201 2 203 12 417 429 1 3 4 636 16:00 16:15 197 4 201 14 .430 444 4 7 11 656 16:15 16:30 210 3 213 16 427 443 3 6 9 665 16:30 16:45 203 3 206 17 439 456 4 8 12 674 16:45 17:00 210 5 215 21 448 469 5 5 10 694 17:00 17:15 197 4 201 15 451 466 3 8 11 678 17:15 17:30 188 4 192 10 433 443 6 5 11 646 17:30 1 17:45 181 5 186 7 412 419 2 6 8 613 17:45 P.M. Total 1587 30 1617 112 3457 0 3569 28 0 48 76 0 0 0 0 5262 P.M. Total 1 Hour E ROUTE 7 WB: ROUTE 7 NB: ROUTE 659 SB: 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Tltru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:00 0 1102 5 1107 17 641 0 658 20 0 46 66 0 0 0 0 1831 7:00 7:15 0 1122 6 1128 20 684 0 704 25 0 42 67 0 0 0 0 1899 7:15 7:30 0 1124 7 1131 23 718 0 741 27 0 45 72 0 0 0 0 1944 7:30 7:45 1131 8 1139 21 751 0 772 24 0 45 69 0 0 0 0 1980 7:45 8'A0 1103 7 1110 19 760 0 779 20 0 42 62 0 0 0 0 1951 8:00 16:00 811 12 823 59 1713 0 1772 12 0 24 36 0 0 0 0 2631 16:00 16:15 820 15 835 68 1744 0 1812 16 0 26 42 0 0 0 0 2689 16:15 16:30 820 15 835 69 1765 0 1834 15 0 27 42 0 0 0 0 2711 16:30 16:45 798 16 814 63 1771 0 1834 18 0 26 44 0 0 0 0 2692 16:45 17:00 776 18 794 53 1744 0 1797 16 0 24 40 0 0 0 0 2631 17:00 1 Hour E ROUTE7 WB: ROUTE7 NB: ROUTE 659 SB'. 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining L ft Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:45 1131 8 1139 21 751 0 772 24 0 45 69 0 0 0 0 1980 7:45 A.M. Peak PHF 0.98 PHF 0.97 PHF 0.82 PHF 0.99 A.M. Peak 16:30 820 15 835 69 1765 0 1834 15 0 27 42 0 0 0 0 2711 16:30 P.M. Peak PHF 0.97 PHF 0.98 PHF 0.88 PHF 0.98 P.M. Peak Intersection: E -W: R0UTE 7 Weather Dry File Input Name N -S: ROUTE 660 Count By JJP By JJP Location WINCHESTER, VA Count Date 3292005 15 Minute EB: ROUTE 7 WB: ROUTE 7 NB: ROUTE 660 SH: ROUTE 660 15 Min. Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thro Ri ht Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:00 15 258 273 134 4 138 0 13 6 19 430 7:00 7:15 19 266 285 156 8 164 0 11 8 19 468 7:15 7:30 22 256 278 166 8 174 0 14 11 25 477 7:30 7:45 27 269 296 177 6 183 0 22 9 31 510 7:45 8:00 25 271 296 189 4 193 0 19 6 25 514 8:00 8:15 22 257 279 188 6 194 0 21 7 28 50I 8115 8:30 25 252 277 190 5 195 0 16 4 20 492 8:30 8:45 28 249 277 195 7 202 0 13 7 20 499 8:45 A.M. Total 183 2078 2261 0 1395 48 1443 0 0 0 0 129 0 58 187 3891 A.M. Total 16 :00 30 200 230 399 16 415 3 12 15 660 16:00 16:15 32 196 228 401 19 420 5 10 15 663 16:15 16:30 28 209 237 411 22 433 4 11 15 685 16:30 16:45 21 202 223 416 29 445 4 14 18 686 16:45 17:00 21 210 231 432 33 465 5 10 15 711 17:00 17:15 20 199 219 419 31 450 2 11 13 682 17:15 17:30 15 189 204 398 28 426 3 6 9 639 17:30 17:45 16 183 199 382 22 404 3 7 10 613 17:45 P.M. Total 183 1588 1771 0 3258 200 3458 0 0 0 0 29 0 81 110 5339 P.M. Total 1 Hour EB: ROUTE 7 WB: ROUTE 7 NB: ROUTE 660 SB: ROUTE 660 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Ri ht Total Left Thru Right Total Lett 'Thru Right Total Left Thu Right Total E W Begining 7:00 83 1049 1132 0 633 26 659 0 0 0 0 60 0 34 94 1885 7:00 7:15 93 1062 1155 0 688 26 714 0 0 0 0 66 0 34 100 1969 7:15 7:30 96 1053 1149 0 720 24 744 0 0 0 0 76 0 33 109 2002 7:30 7:45 99 1049 1148 0 744 21 765 0 0 0 0 78 0 26 104 2017 7:45 8:00 100 1029 1129 0 762 22 784 0 0 0 0 69 0 24 93 2006 8:00 16:00 111 807 918 0 1627 86 1713 0 0 0 0 16 0 47 63 2694 16:00 16:15 102 817 919 0 1660 103 1763 0 0 0 0 18 0 45 63 2745 16:15 16:30 90 820 910 0 1678 115 1793 D 0 0 0 15 0 46 61 2764 16:30 16:45 77 800 877 0 1665 121 1786 0 0 0 0 14 0 41 55 2718 16:45 17:00 72 781 853 0 1631 114 1745 0 0 0 0 13 0 34 47 2645 17:00 1 Hour EB: ROUTE 7 WB: ROUTE 7 NB: ROUTE 660 SB: ROUTE 660 1 Hour Period N,S, Period Begining Left Thru Right 'Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total Left Thru Right Total E W Begining 7:45 99 1049 0 1148 0 744 21 765 0 0 0 0 78 0 26 104 2017 7:45 A.M. Peak PHF 0.97 PHF 0.98 PHF PHF 0.84 0.98 A.M. Peak 16:30 90 820 0 910 0 1678 115 1793 0 0 0 0 15 0 46 61 2764 16:30 P.M. Peak PHF 0.96 PHF 0.96 PHF PHF 0.85 0.97 P.M. Peak Approach delay (s /veh) pproach LOS HCS2000 Copyright 02003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates 1 HCS2000m DETAILED REPORT Jeneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/5/2005 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Woods Mill Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2007 Background y Conditions Project ID Jordan Springs Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lane group L T T R L R Volume, V (vph) 150 1389 1095 37 127 152 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 iltering /metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 45 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min, time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 r 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 50.0 G= G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 158 1462 1153 39 134 113 Lane group capacity, c 171 1896 1896 1524 568 508 v/c ratio, X 0.92 0.77 0.61 0.03 0.24 0.22 dotal green ratio, g/C 0.56 0.56 0.56 1.00 0.33 0.33 Jniform delay, d 18.3 15.6 13.4 0.0 21.7 21.6 Patton Harris Rust Associates Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.950 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.44 0.32 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 47.3 20 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.2 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 65.6 17.6 14.0 0.0 21.9 21.8 Lane group LOS E 8 8 A C C Approach delay 22 3 13.5 21.9 Approach LOS C B C Intersection delay 18.8 X 0.67 Intersection LOS B HCS2000 Copyright 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates Version 4.1 HCS2000"' DETAILED REPORT leneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 4/5/2005 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Woods Mill Rd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, VA Analysis Year 2015 Background Conditions Project ID Jordan Springs Development Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lane group L T T R L R Volume, V (vph) 235 1234 2147 172 43 131 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 20 20 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 45 Lane width 120 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 60.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 247 1299 2260 181 45 91 Lane group capacity, c 269 2655 2275 1270 189 423 v/c ratio, X 0.92 0.49 0.99 0.14 0.24 0.22 Total green ratio, g/C 0.78 0.78 0.67 0.83 0.11 0.28 Jniform delay, d 30.9 3.6 14.8 1.4 36.5 25.0 Patton Harris Rust Associates 1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.44 0.11 0.49 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d 34.0 0.1 17.3 0.1 0.7 0.3 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 65.0 3.7 32.1 1.5 37.2 25.2 Lane group LOS E A C A D C Approach delay 13 5 29.8 29.2 Approach LOS B C C Intersection delay 23.7 X 0.96 Intersection LOS C HC52000 Patton Harris Rust Associates Copyright O 200 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 04/07/05 Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour general Information Site Information Project Description Carriage Park Development East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY North /South Street: Route 659 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 121 0.95 127 6 1 L 2 T 1419 0.95 1493 2 T 0 3 R 51 0.95 53 0 0 TR Westbound 4 L 61 0.95 64 6 1 L 5 T 900 0.95 947 2 T 0 6 R 0 0.95 0 Raised curb 0 0 Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration pproach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95 Northbound 7 L 164 0.95 172 6 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 0 0 EB 1 L 127 696 0.18 0.66 11.3 8 N 0 0 LR WB 4 L 64 406 0.16 0.55 15.5 C 9 R 161 0.95 169 6 0 0 Northbound 7 8 LR 341 118 2.89 31.89 930.3 F Southbound 10 L 0 0:95 0 0 0 9 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 Southbound 10 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 11 12 t 'llinor Street _lovement Control Delay (s /veh) 1 05 Patton Harris Rust Associates .Approach delay (s /veh) 13proach LOS 930.3 F HCS2000TM Copyright 2003 Unive city of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 04/07/05 Analysis Year 2007 Build -out Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Patton Harris Rust Associates general Information Project Description Carriage Park Development East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information North /South Street: Route 659 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 63 0.95 66 6 1 L 2 T 1087 0.95 1144 2 T 0 3 R 168 0.95 176 0 0 TR Westbound 4 L 212 0.95 223 6 1 L 5 T 2208 0.95 2324 2 T 0 6 R 0 0.95 0 Raised curb 0 0 linor Street ,Iovement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Northbound 7 L 103 0.95 108 6 0 0 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 LR 9 R 115 0.95 121 6 0 0 Southbound 10 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 Control Delay (s /veh) SOS EB 1 L 66 199 0.33 1.38 31.8 D WB 4 L 223 499 0.45 2.27 17.9 C Northbound 7 8 LR 229 25 9.16 28.51 3976 F 9 Southbound 10 11 12 (Approach delay (s /veh) bproach LOS HCS2000 3976 Copyright 2003 Chive sity of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 41d Patton Harris Rust Associates HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT eneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 04/07/05 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County,Virginia Analysis Year 2007 Buildout Conditions Project ID Carriage Park Development Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane group L TR L T LR Volume, V (vph) 121 1419 51 61 900 164 161 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2. 0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 120 12.0 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 52.0 G= G= G= G= 28.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 127 1548 64 947 342 Lane group capacity, c 256 1962 85 1972 508 v/c ratio, X 0.50 0.79 0.75 0.48 0.67 Total green ratio, gIC 0.58 0.58 0,58 0.58 0.31 iniform delay, d 11.2 14.7 14.2 11.1 27.0 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Patton Harris Rust Associates Progression factor, PF delay calibration, k 0.11 0.34 0.31 0.11 0.25 Incremental delay, d 1.5 2.2 31.0 0.2 3.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 12.8 17.0 45.2 11.3 30.5 Lane group LOS B B D B C Approach delay 16 7 13.4 30.5 Approach LOS 8 8 C Intersection delay 17.2 X 0.75 Intersection LOS B N Copyright 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates Version 4.1 Im HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT ieneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 04/07/05 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Analysis Year 20078ui/dout Conditions Project ID Carriage Park Development Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N, 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane group L TR L T LR Volume, V (vph) 63 1087. 168 212 2208 103 115 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0 -95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0 -0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 30 0 Lane width 120 12.0 12.0 /20 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 20.0 G= 42.0 G= G= G= 20.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 92.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 66 1321 223 2324 197 Lane group capacity, c 78 1527 448 2300 356 v/c ratio, X 0.85 0.87 0.50 1.01 0.55 Total green ratio, g/C 0.46 0.46 0.67 0.67 0.22 'jniform delay, d 22.1 225 17.1 15.0 32.0 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Patton Harris Rust Associates ,Progression factor, PF ,ielay calibration, k 0.38 0.39 0.11 0.50 0.15 Incremental delay, d 54.1 5.5 0.9 21.4 1.9 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 76.3 27.9 18.0 36.4 33.9 Lane group LOS E C 8 D C Approach delay 30 2 34.7 33.9 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 33.2 X 0.89 Intersection LOS C ICS2000 Copyright O 200 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates Version 4.1e Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 660 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Year 2007 Buildout Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, P Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal 1 L 150 0.95 157 6 1 L TWO WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Eastbound 2 T 1401 0.95 1474 2 T 0 Site Information North /South Street: Route 660 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Westbound 4 L 8 0.95 8 6 0 LT 5 T 1140 0.95 1200 6 R 37 0.95 38 Raised curb 2 0 0 0 TR 1 1 Project Description Carriage Park Development East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East West Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 7 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) c.ratio Queue length (95 Northbound 0 EB 1 L 157 537 0.29 1.21 14.5 B 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 WB 4 LT 8 434 0.02 0.06 13.5 B 9 R 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 Northbound 7 8 Southbound 10 L 127 0.95 133 6 0 0 9 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 LR Southbound 1 0 12 R 152 0.95 160 6 0 0 11 LR 293 184 1.59 19.31 336.1 F 12 linor Street lovement °ontrol Delay (s /veh) OS Patton Harris Rust Associates (Approach delay (s /veh) )iproach LOS HCS2000T 1 I I 336.1 Copyright 20(33 Unive city of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.14 Patton Harris Rust Associates Approach delay (s /veh) hproach LOS HCS2000 694.0 F Copyright O 2003 Unive sity of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Jeneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 04/07/05 Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description Carriage Park Development East/West Street: Route 7 North /South Street: Route 659 Intersection Orientation: East West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 39 1071 168 212 2178 0 Peak hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 41 1127 176 223 2292 0 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV 6 6 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound ,tovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 103 0 115 0 0 0 Peak hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 108 0 121 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PEN 6 0 6 0 Percent grade 0 0 Flared approach N Y Storage 0 1 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L LR Volume, v (vph) 41 223 229 Capacity, c (vph) 205 506 62 v/c ratio 0.20 0.44 3.69 Queue length (95 0.72 2.22 24.40 Control Delay (s /veh) 26.9 17.6 1350 :bs D C F Patton Harris Rust Associates _Approach delay (s /veh) )pproach LOS HCS200oTM 1350 1 F Copyright 2003 Unive sily of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates Version 4.Id I. HCS2000 DETAILED REPORT 3 eneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 04/07/05 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Carriage Park Development Project ID Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane group L TR L T LR Volume, V (vph) 76 1389 51 61 892 164 161 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start -up lost time, 1 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 20 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 20 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 120 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G, 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing_ EW Perm 02 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 52.0 G= G= G= G= 28.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 80 1516 64 939 342 Lane group capacity, c 259 1962 91 1972 508 v/c ratio, X 0.31 0.77 0.70 0.48 0.67 Total green ratio, g/C 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.31 =jniform delay, d 9.8 14.5 13.5 11.1 27.0 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Patton Harris Rust Associates I Prog ression factor, PF Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.32 0.27 0.11 0.25 Incremental delay, d 0.7 2.0 21.7 0.2 3.5 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 10.4 16.5 35.2 11.2 30.5 Lane group LOS B 8 D 8 C Approach delay 16.2 128 30.5 Approach LOS B B C Intersection delay 16.7 X 0.74 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Patton Harris Rust Associates Copyright 0 200 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved ersion a. i e 1 HCS2000" DETAILED REPORT leneral Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A y Agency or Co. PHR +A Date Performed 04/07/05 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Carriage Park Development Project ID Suggested Improvement Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 2 0 1 2' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane group L TR L T LR Volume, V (vph) 39 1071 168 212 2178 103 115 Heavy vehicles, %HV 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 filtering /metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped Bike RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking Grade Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N N Parking maneuvers, N Buses stopping, N 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 18.0 G= 40.0 G= G= G= 19.0 G= G= G= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T 0.25 Cycle Length, C 87.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 41 1304 223 2293 229 Lane group capacity, c 83 1537 435 2275 355 v/c ratio, X 0.49 0.85 0.51 1.01 0.65 Total green ratio, g/C 0.46 0.46 0.67 0.67 0.22 niform delay, d 16.4 20.8 15.8 14.5 30.9 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Patton Harris Rust Associates Progression factor, PF )elay calibration, k 0.11 0.38 0.12 0.50 0.22 Incremental delay, d 4.6 4.7 1.0 20.8 4.0 Initial queue delay, d Control delay 21.0 25.5 16.8 35.3 34.9 Lane group LOS C C 6 D C Approach delay 25.4 33.7 34.9 Approach LOS C C C Intersection delay 31.0 X 0.91 Intersection LOS C IICS2000 l Copyright 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Patton Harris Rust Associates Version 4.1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY general Information Site Information Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 660 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Analysis Year Frederick County,Virginia 2007 Background Conditions Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description Carriage Park Development East/West Street: Route 7 North /South Street: Route 660 Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 150 1361 0 0 1095 37 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 157 1432 0 0 1152 38 Proportion of heavy vehicles, P 6 6 Median type Raised curb RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration L T T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound lovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 0 0 0 127 0 152 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 133 0 160 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv 6 0 6 6 0 6 Percent grade 0 0 Flared approach N Y Storage 0 1 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR C ontrol Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR Volume, v (vph) 157 293 Capacity, c (vph) 560 203 /c ratio 0.28 1.44 Queue length (95 1.14 17.52 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.9 269.0 IDS B F Patton Harris Rust Associates !Approach delay (s /veh) "pproach LOS HCS2000 Copyright 0 2003 Univc city of Florida. All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust Associates 269.0 F Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 660 Agency/Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour eneral Informat Project Description Carriage Park Development Site Information East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East West TWO WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY North /South Street: Route 660 Study Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, P Median type RT Channelized Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 235 0.95 247 6 1 L 2 T 1234 0.95 1298 2 T 0 3 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Westbound 4 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 5 T 2147 0.95 2260 2 T 0 6 R 172 0.95 181 Raised curb 0 0 TR 1 Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, P Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration pproach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95 Northbound 7 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service EB 1 L 247 178 1.39 14.86 254.7 F 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 WB 4 9 R 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 Northbound 7 8 Southbound 10 L 43 0.95 45 6 0 9 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 V 0 LR 10 12 R 131 0.95 137 6 0 0 0 Southbound 11 LR 182 12 Minor Street lovement Control Delay (s /veh) ibs Patton Harris Rust Associates Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 660 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County,Virginia Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Year Existing Traffic Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Project Description Carriage Park Development Information East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West North /South Street: Route 660 Study Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 99 0.95 104 6 1 L 2 T 1061 0.95 1116 2 T 0 3 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Westbound 4 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 5 T 754 0.95 793 2 T 0 6 R 21 0.95 22 Raised curb 0 0 TR 'linor Street Jovement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Northbound 7 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 9 R 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 Southbound 10 L 78 0.95 82 6 0 0 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 LR 12 R 26 0.95 27 6 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 Delay (s /veh) OS EB 1 L 104 783 0.13 0.46 10.3 B WB 4 Northbound 7 8 9 Southbound 1 0 11 LR 109 262 0.42 1.94 28.2 D 12 Patton Harris Rust Associates 'Approach delay (s /veh) ldproach LOS HCS2000TM Patton Harris Rust Associates Copyright 2003 Unive sit) of Florida, All Rights Reserved 28.2 0 Version 4.Id Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 660 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Year Existing Traffic Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Project Description Carriage Park Development Information East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West North /South Street: Route 660 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal 'linor Street .lovement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Eastbound 1 L 90 0.95 94 6 Raised curb 1 L Northbound 7 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 2 T 820 0.95 863 2 T 0 T 0 0.95 0 0 0 0 3 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 9 R 0 0.95 0 6 0 0 0 Westbound 4 L 0 0.95 0 6 0 10 L 15 0.95 15 6 0 5 T 1678 0.95 1766 2 T 0 11 r 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 LR 6 R 115 0.95 121 0 0 TR Southbound 12 R 46 0.95 48 6 0 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 Delay (s /veh) _OS EB 1 L 94 298 0.32 1.31 22.5 C WB 4 Northbound 7 8 9 Southbound 10 11 LR 63 336 0.19 0.68 31.3 D 12 Patton Harris Rust Associates (Approach delay (s/veh) proach LOS HCS2000 Copyright 2003 Unive sity of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.01 Patton Harris Rust Associates 31.3 0 Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 09/10/04 Analysis Year Existing Traffic Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Project Description Carriage Park Development ion East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West North /South Street: Route 659 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 0 0.95 0 0 2 T 1131 0.95 1190 2 T 0 3 R 8 0.95 8 0 0 TR Westbound 4 L 21 0.95 22 6 1 L 5 T 751 0.95 790 2 T 0 6 R 0 0.95 0 Raised curb 0 0 '•Ainor Street Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Northbound 7 L 24 0.95 25 6 0 0 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 LR 9 R 45 0.95 47 6 0 0 Southbound 10 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vpN v/c ratio Queue length (95 Delay (s /veh) ,bS EB 1 WB 4 L 22 556 0.04 0.12 11.7 8 Northbound 7 8 LR 72 297 0.24 0.93 21.0 C 9 Southbound 10 11 12 Patton Harris Rust Associates 'Approach delay (s /veh) ;pp roach LOS /fCS2000 21.0 C Copyright 0 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Patton Harris Rust Associates Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County, Virginia Date Performed 04/07/05 Analysis Year Existing Traffic Conditions Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Project Description Carriage Park Development ite Information East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West North /South Street: Route 659 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 0 0.95 0 0 2 T 820 0.95 863 2 T 0 3 R 15 0.95 15 0 0 TR Westbound 4 L 69 0.95 72 6 1 L 5 T 1778 0.95 1871 2 T 0 6 R 0 0.95 0 Raised curb 0 0 'tinor Street lovement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Northbound 7 L 15 0.95 15 6 0 0 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 LR 9 R 27 0.95 28 6 0 0 Southbound 10 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 ".,ontrol Delay (s /veh) _bS EB 1 WB 4 L 72 740 0.10 0.32 10.4 8 Northbound 7 8 LR 43 295 0.15 0.50 19.3 C 9 Southbound 10 11 12 Patton Harris Rust Associates 'Approach delay (s /veh) aproach LOS UCS2000 19.3 C Copyright 2003 Unive sity of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.Id Patton Harris Rust Associates Analyst PHR +A Intersection Route 7 Route 659 Agency /Co. PHR +A Jurisdiction Frederick County,Virginia Date Performed 04/07/05 Analysis Year 2007 Background Conditions Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description Carriage Park Development Site Information East/West Street: Route 7 Intersection Orientation: East -West TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY North /South Street: Route 659 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Eastbound 1 L 76 0.95 80 6 1 L 2 1389 0.95 1462 2 T 0 3 R 51 0.95 53 0 0 TR Westbound 4 L 61 0.95 64 6 1 L 5 T 892 0.95 938 2 T 0 6 R 0 0.95 0 Raised curb 0 0 1 Volume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, P Percent grade Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) /c ratio Queue length (95 Northbound 7 L 164 0.95 172 6 0 0 EB 1 L 80 702 0.11 0.38 10.8 8 8 T 0 0.95 0 0 N 0 0 LR WB 4 L 64 418 0.15 0.54 15.2 C 9 R 161 0.95 169 6 0 0 Northbound 7 8 LR 341 143 2.38 29.14 694.0 F Southbound 10 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 9 11 T 0 0.95 0 0 Y 1 0 Southbound 10 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 11 12 Minor Street ;lovement control Delay (s /veh) bs Patton Harris Rust Associates