The URL can be used to link to this page

TC 09-27-10 Meeting AgendaCOUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Transportation Committee FROM: John A. Bishop, AICP, Deputy Director - Transportation RE: September 27, 2010 Transportation Committee Meeting DATE: September 21, 2010 The Frederick County Transportation Committee will be meeting at 8:30 a.m. on Monday. September 27, 2010 in the first floor conference room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. AGENDA 1. Amherst Street Improvements Request 2. Comprehensive Plan Update 3. Capital Improvement Plan update 4. Route 522 South Draft Report 5. Other Please contact our department if you are unable to attend this meeting. Attachments 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 C • • Item 1: Amherst Street Improvements Request Attached please find communication from the Frederick County School Superintendant regarding a funding request they received from the City of Winchester. As you will see in the attached materials, the City is planning to make improvements to the Amherst Street corridor that include alignment and signalization of the school entrance with Fox Drive and modifications to the School's other two entrances. Staff is seeking feedback and recommendations from the committee regarding how this request should be addressed. ON Frederick (County Public Schools to ensure all students an excellent education Superintendent of Schools Momora4AAU*VV TO: John R. Riley, Jr -/-County Administrator 6 FROM: Patricia TaylMo, kuperintendent of Schools taylorp@frec1erick.k12.va.us RE: City of Winchester — Proposed Improvements on Amherst Street DATE: September 10, 2010 The attached City of Winchester proposal for improvements on Amherst Street along with a request for "cost sharing" was received by Wayne Lee, Coordinator of Planning and Development, Frederick County Public Schools, in a meeting on September 8, 2010, from Perry Eisenach, City of Winchester Public Utilities Director; and, Timothy Youmans, City of Winchester Planning Director. Although I had general knowledge of interest in improvements to the Amherst Street corridor by the City of Winchester, this did come as a surprise. Mr. Lee also was informed that a November, 2010, public hearing is being planned on the proposed improvements. This proposal calls for cost sharing in the amount of $301,500.00 by the school board in an unknown total project cost. Although there is no question that signal and stacking lanes at the Fox Drive intersection would be a safety improvement, it limits two of the three entrances/exits at the Central Administration/James Wood Middle School campus to right-hand exits only. I would appreciate any insight or guidance that you may offer on this proposal from City of Winchester officials. As you know, resources are very limited and prior to having our contracted civil engineer evaluate School Entrance Exhibit C1. 00, I would value your assessment of political and financial dynamics of which I may not be aware. Attachment PT/snr 1415 Amherst Street www.frederick.k12.va.us 540-662-3888 P.O. Box 3508 fax 540-722-2788 Winchester, Virginia 22604-2546 ,r z Owl / sexfj RE: City of Winchester — Proposed Improvements on Amherst Street DATE: September 10, 2010 The attached City of Winchester proposal for improvements on Amherst Street along with a request for "cost sharing" was received by Wayne Lee, Coordinator of Planning and Development, Frederick County Public Schools, in a meeting on September 8, 2010, from Perry Eisenach, City of Winchester Public Utilities Director; and, Timothy Youmans, City of Winchester Planning Director. Although I had general knowledge of interest in improvements to the Amherst Street corridor by the City of Winchester, this did come as a surprise. Mr. Lee also was informed that a November, 2010, public hearing is being planned on the proposed improvements. This proposal calls for cost sharing in the amount of $301,500.00 by the school board in an unknown total project cost. Although there is no question that signal and stacking lanes at the Fox Drive intersection would be a safety improvement, it limits two of the three entrances/exits at the Central Administration/James Wood Middle School campus to right-hand exits only. I would appreciate any insight or guidance that you may offer on this proposal from City of Winchester officials. As you know, resources are very limited and prior to having our contracted civil engineer evaluate School Entrance Exhibit C1. 00, I would value your assessment of political and financial dynamics of which I may not be aware. Attachment PT/snr 1415 Amherst Street www.frederick.k12.va.us 540-662-3888 P.O. Box 3508 fax 540-722-2788 Winchester, Virginia 22604-2546 City of Winchester Amherst Street Project Preliminary Cost Estimate for Improvements at Frederick County :Middle School Date: 8/30/10 Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Demolition/Clearing/Grading LS 1 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Concrete Curb (CG -6) LF 1200 $ 30.00 $ 36,000.00 Compacted Gravel (Road Base) Tons 450 $ 40.00 $ 18,000.00 Base Asphalt Tons 250 $ 85.00 $ 21,250.00 Surface Asphalt Tons 150 $ 85.00 $ 12,750.00 Colored Concrete Median SY 75 $ 100.00 $ 7,500.00 Tree Removal/Replacement Each 8 $ 2,000.00 $ 16,000.00 Traffic Signal (1/2 total cost) at Entrance/Fox LS 1 $ 125,000.00 $ 125,000.00 Restoration (seeding/mulching) LS 1 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 Design/Project Management LS 1 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Total Cost Paid By Frederick County Schools $ 301,500.00 City of Winchester and Frederick County School [district Proposal for Intergovernmental Agreement For Improvements on Amherst Street Draft: 8/30/2010 1. Proposed Improvements to be included as part of Amherst Street Project: a. Reconfigure new school entrance to align with Fox Drive b. Construct 300 foot long right turn lane on Amherst into new entrance (eastbound) c. Construct 150 foot long left turn lane on Amherst into new entrance d. Install new traffic signal at Fox Drive/Entrance. A traffic signal warrant study was completed and a signal is warranted at this location. 2. Frederick County Schools to grant City an easement for Green Circle Trail - 10 -foot wide asphalt trail. 3. Construction on new school entrance to be completed during summer of 2012 when school is not in session. 4. Frederick County Schools to pay City of Winchester $301,500 for their proportionate share of the improvements. (see attached). == r. lZ i �' a ' - „ys: -.. _-- - -. } �. w w { • { { - A. MORTON THOMAS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. is p - • �, .r`"yT .i 1 r CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2 '-•' -'•.=g ;;.- - ' -. 10710 MIDLOTHIAN T11111%TT 202 h y, •• _ _ r• ! • 1 RICHMOND GINIA 23235 i . VAR 4- (B WWIN.AMTENGIN3(1304) 3 EFRING.COM • 10 w ]Ir I V J � a •i" _ _ - REGISTRATION STAMP y �r s _` , = . -DONALD ,,L•'gBME1'Eft^ N. 26104.2 (OWNER -i 0 r; - • _.__ - _;rie. CININCHE DEPARTMENT OF CUT 5 ORTH CAMERON STREETTIES f ... . * r ...,,. S WINCHESTER: VA 22601 '. (540) 667.1615 ... _.: e . { ' . • . - va6.ma ... x. -.-- .. - (540) 723•0238 (fez) .a, • -. * a ' PROJECT TITLE ' AMHERST STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FROM: CAMPUS BLVD. •,. - .,. rr w '-, - _ i TO: WHITIER AVE. CITY OF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA - - _ � � � � • i ,�r. -! t elf i! t I REVISIONS MARK DATE DEE CRIPTION - _ -_ � f I I • $ �� r . z +�. A r: .: tJ #, - i x AMT FILE NO. 106a94.01 DATE: 07-08-2010 iS SCALE. 4-29 DESIGNED BY: DKM �.DRAWNBY' LAL .�t Alt r CHEGKEDBY: DJR JIL .'P'•Y, * - ! f / SHEET TITLE - ", � , • . _' . " � .,� SCHOOL ENTRANCE EXHIBIT META' SCALE: 1"=30' PREUMINARY - SUBJECT TO REVISIONS m o GRAPHICSC�LE :o '� SHEET -. - r h ( IN FEET ) 1 i�h = 50 !t. SHGET - OF 32 - - s— ups=+- _ =.r... __ _ mr__r•�rr��r�� ®w: �-- -._� rs�,. —�. 7=: _ - _ _ - •rrr.A.v::er=a�w�.ti - n u • • Item 2: Comprehensive Plan Update Attached please find the most recent draft of the Comprehensive Plan's new transportation section. Staff would note that work on the maps is ongoing and updated mapping will be available at the meeting. Staff would greatly appreciate any and all feedback regarding this update. This draft has also been provided to the various stakeholder groups with whom staff met prior to its preparation. 3 TRANSPORTATION CURRENT CONDITIONS Frederick County has grown significantly in the past two decades in both population and economic development, placing a significant demand upon the Frederick County transportation system. Current County policy follows State Code guidance to ensure that new development shall offset its impacts to the transportation system. While the Board of Supervisors worked to make sure that proffers offset impacts at the time of rezoning, a significant portion of congested roadways in the County can be linked to by -right development that does not offset its transportation impacts since it is not required by Virginia State Code. This has had the greatest impact upon Interstate 81 and the primary highways in the County. Primary Highways include Routes 37, 522, 50, 7, 277 and 11. Based upon the most recent Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) data available (2007), Frederick County has 1663 lane miles of roadway that are part of the state system. As of 2008, VDOT estimates that vehicles traveled 2,966,846 per day on Frederick County roadways. This is a 213% increase since 1990. The vast majority of this travel is focused upon the Interstate and Primary system. The County makes use of an Urban Development Area (UDA), the purpose of which is to centralize most urban growth within its boundary. In addition, the County has recently taken additional steps to incentivize growth within the UDA by adopting transfer of development rights (TDR) which allows by right residential development to be sold by landowners outside the UDA to landowners inside the UDA. Ultimately, these policies increase traffic in the UDA area, but this is still a net financial benefit to the County. The reason for this is that this allows the County and State to focus roadway improvements within the UDA as opposed to having to expand roadways throughout the entire county. The Eastern Road Plan is the guide to roadway development/improvements in and around the UDA area. Improvements in the more rural western portion of the County are limited to safety and maintenance as opposed to creating additional capacity. The possible exception to this would be areas where the Comprehensive Plan proposes the development of rural community centers. As of the year 2000 census, the Frederick County, Winchester, and Stephens City area reached the population trigger that led to the federally required creation of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). In Frederick County, the MPO boundary is concentrated around the development in the eastern section, and along Route 11 to West Virginia in the N North and to Stephens City in the South. The MPO is staffed by the Northern Shenandoah Valley Planning District Commission and is responsible for creating a long range transportation plan that meets FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 1 TRANSPORTATION air quality standards. The most recent adopted long range plan is the 2030 plan, which is available through the regional commission. Recent funding of transportation improvements in Frederick County has largely been accomplished through development proffers and the VDOT revenue sharing program. Whenever possible, the County uses public private partnerships to make improvements. The County is also active in the areas of rail access funding and for economic development road access funding. The State's role in transportation funding has been declining and has now reached the point where some federal funds are being used for maintenance and very little new construction is taking place. The State has been actively encouraging localities to take on maintenance of their road systems. Currently, it is Frederick County's policy that public roadway construction is primarily the responsibility of the State and Federal government. How the County, State, and Federal governments work together to create a long term funding policy for transportation will have far reaching impacts on transportation in Frederick County. AGENCIES/COMMITTEES INVOLVED The Frederick County Transportation Committee (TC) is appointed by the Board of Supervisors to review issues in the County including transportation planning, safety, and regional coordination. When the TC reviews an item, they take action on whether to recommend or not recommend approval to the Board. As staff and the TC work on these items, there are a number of agencies with whom they regularly engage as follows: • Virginia Department of Transportation • Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transit • Federal Highway Administration • WinFred MPO • Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission In addition to the agencies, the TC often works with the following groups on different special projects. • Frederick County Sheriff's Department • Virginia State Police (Kernstown barracks) • Frederick County Fire and Rescue • Frederick County Public Schools • Winchester Frederick Economic Development Commission FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 2 TRANSPORTATION I t. Proposedlnterchanges =' EasternRdPlan_Update Rd, Catagory C�Y1 Interstate 81 i DRAFT - Eastern Road Plan Update - DRAFT FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 3 TRANSPORTATION FOCUS/DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE In the next twenty to thirty years, it is expected that a number of key transportation milestones will be reached. The question of how road construction will be funded long term will need to be resolved. This will allow significant transportation system improvements to move forward. Most critical is the completion of Route 37 East. This roadway is critical for both residential and economic development traffic and was noted in virtually every stakeholder meeting that was held in the development of this plan. The County will encourage the integration of complete streets principles into the transportation practices of the County. These principles aim to balance the diverse needs of all users of the public right-of-way and promote an integrated, multi -modal transportation system for automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, and transit. Complete street policies will benefit Frederick County as they address important safety, health, and environmental considerations, target special populations, and promote growth and revitalization within the community. It is expected that transit will begin to play a larger role in Frederick County transportation. This would begin with on demand type services for the elderly and disabled and potentially develop into a more traditional fixed route system. As densities increase in the UDA and citizen preferences continue to shift, it is expected that bicycle and pedestrian accommodations will continue to increase in importance. The Frederick County School system has recently opened its first elementary school (Greenwood Mill Elementary) with a walk zone, and they plan to continue to try and promote this type of school. At Greenwood Mill, the school actually had to install additional bike racks to accommodate the large number of children riding bikes to school. A complete streets policy will also help to move these goals forward. Finally, with the growth potential of the Virginia Inland Port in Warren County, Frederick County can expect a continuing increase in freight movement via rail and roadways. The development of the County's transportation infrastructure should continue to address transportation improvements that will further the economic growth of the community. This would also include fulfilling the potential of the Winchester Regional Airport_ FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 4 TRANSPORTATION Community Benefits The benefits to the community of a healthy transportation system are immeasurable. An efficient transportation system leads to communities that are less stressed, healthier, less polluted, safer, and more attractive to economic development opportunities and new residents. A policy that creates an interconnected system of bicycle and pedestrian facilities will lead to a healthier and fitter community, as well as increased home values. Removal of cars from the roadway would lead to reduced congestion and reduced air pollution. The mixed use land use pattern promoted by New Urbanism and the Urban Center concept of this Plan furthers these benefits. The transportation system is always a key consideration for business locations. An efficient transportation system will make the County more attractive to new businesses and will also keep existing businesses from looking to locate elsewhere. In addition, continued focus in intermodal opportunities (the transfer of goods between different transportation modes such as truck to rail or air) in the area will make the County more attractive to businesses looking to take advantage of rail sidings or locations near the airport. The County's willingness to support both road and rail access funding has already led to increased economic development interest. The result is more jobs for County citizens, as well as a more valuable tax base. POLICIES/IMPLEMENTATION As residential and commercial development continues, increasing demands will be placed upon the County's transportation infrastructure. Challenges will continue to be placed on the County by users of 1-81 and commuters through the area. Transportation demands need to be addressed while protecting and promoting the goals of the Comprehensive Plan as a whole. This will include the uses of tools such as context sensitive design and planning/locating roadways with consideration of future planned land uses and types. The role of Frederick County is to first plan the transportation system and then work with new and existing development to preserve corridor rights of way and implement construction. It is the role of the State and Federal government along, with development, to fund transportation improvements FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 5 TRANSPORTATION POLICY: The County will work to craft and adopt a complete streets policy to guide the development of new roadways and the redevelopment of existing roadways in a manner that makes them open, available, and safe to all modes of transportation. IMPLEMENTATION: • Match desired form of development to roadway classification to simplify the determination of which roadways receive which treatment; that is, different types of streets for different land uses. • Support State efforts to implement complete streets policies and advance local implementation of complete streets policies. • Work with new development and redevelopment to implement the complete streets policy and transportation plan. This may require analysis and modification of the existing subdivision ordinance. • Work cooperatively with the schools division to identify school locations that meet both school and County goals of public access and safe walkability. o Support schools in the search for funding to enhance walkability around existing schools, particularly Greenwood Mill and Bass Hoover. o Include local stakeholder groups in order to determine how best to meet their needs and find compromises where differences of opinion exist. • Seek outside funding sources to fill in gaps in order to attach separate segments and create a fully interconnected system. POLICY: Implement the roadway priorities of the County, principally the Eastern Road Plan, and particularly Route 37 east. IMPLEMENTATION: • Work with new development and redevelopment to implement the Eastern Road Plan through construction and preservation of right-of-ways. • Continue to work closely with VDOT, State and Federal Representatives, and any other available funding source to increase funding to transportation. FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 6 TRANSPORTATION • In the absence of outside funding, continue to protect right-of-ways and move planning forward on transportation priorities. • Coordinate with the Virginia Department of Transportation to make sure the required percentage of maintenance funds to be spent on other accommodations is used on County priorities. • Maintain the character of the rural roadways in the County while addressing safety issues as they may arise. POLICY: Improve upon existing transportation safety and service levels in the County. IMPLEMENTATION: • Coordinate with VDOT in the scoping and reviews of Traffic Impact Analyses. • Analyze VDOT Access Management standards and adopt County standards that are stronger when needed. o Determine where the County may need to adopt standards in order to have a say in VDOT waivers. o Seek outside funds to install retrofits to existing corridors where they can be equitably applied. • Investigate the creation of a facility standards manual. • Work with new development and redevelopment to ensure that the trip generation and new movements do not degrade the transportation system, increase delays, or reduce service levels. • Coordinate with VDOT, Local and State law enforcement, and the schools division, to identify and address areas of safety concern. The planning staff and Transportation Committee would be appropriate bodies for this coordination. o Work with VDOT to analyze the potential signalization of the entrance to Gainesboro Elementary. o Seek outside funding sources to provide safe crossings of Route 7 and Route 277 in the vicinities of Millwood High School and Sherando High School. • Work with State officials to bring another General District Court Judge to the area as previously approved. This would significantly reduce the amount of overtime currently paid, as well as make for more efficient use of officer's time. FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 7 TRANSPORTATION • Work with State officials to increase support of the Sheriff's office. • Work with State officials to increase support of the State Police Kernstown Barracks. In spite of significant local growth, this barracks has not had an increase in troopers in more than a decade. POLICY: Find ways to implement transportation needs while keeping the cost of industrial property competitive. Work to enhance use of intermodal freight movement wherever possible. IMPLEMENTATION: • Create a working group comprised of members from interest groups, staff, and the Transportation Committee to review the forms of proffers and develop a preferred approach for developing transportation proffers that will best aid the competitiveness of local industrial sites, while ensuring the needed transportation improvements are put in place. • Coordinate with local business to maximize the use of Economic Development Road Access funding as well as Rail Access funding. • Actively work with rail carriers through the Economic Development Commission and Industrial Parks Association to maximize the amount of material that is shipped in to and out of Frederick County via rail. • Perform a study to discern where opportunities to bring air freight into the regional airport may be available. • Work to incentivize and maximize on opportunities presented by expandability of the Virginia Inland Port and the new multimodal facility coming to Martinsburg, WV. • Make use of revenue sharing funds for development of industrial property when the Board of Supervisors determines that it is in the best interest of Frederick County. • Incorporate the Airport Master Plan into County planning efforts. FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 8 TRANSPORTATION POLICY: Improve the beauty of transportation corridors at the County gateways and along commercial roadways. IMPLEMENTATION: • Work with VDOT to create roadway design plans that meet standards while beautifying local gateways and commercial corridors. • Through the Transportation Committee, create a plan for, and actively promote, corridor beautification. • Work with Shenandoah University to create a more attractive County entrance to the university. POLICY: Ensure safe operation of fire and rescue vehicles and school buses. IMPLEMENTATION: • Investigate the existence and potential removal of barriers between neighborhoods that lead to delays in response, particularly for the Greenwood and Millwood Companies. • Promote the adoption of a uniform locking technology acceptable to the Fire and Rescue Department for use on gated and locked emergency access points. • Analyze driving, road, and parking standards and actively seek Fire and Rescue Department input for driveways and roads to ensure that all approved developments are accessible by fire equipment. • Review parking standards, particularly in townhome developments, to ensure that they realistically allow access for fire equipment. POLICY: Provide cost effective alternatives to automobile travel as needed, for the elderly, disabled, and work force. IMPLEMENTATION: • Coordinate with existing agencies, such as Shenandoah Area Agency on Aging and Access Independence, to secure outside funds to enhance service to the elderly and disabled in the community. FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 9 TRANSPORTATION • Make use of MPO resources to identify areas of most critical need. • Monitor existing data source updates to determine areas of growing need. SUPPORTING MATERIALS/RESOURCES Airport Master Plan Complete Streets Guidebook MPO 2030 Transportation Plan Frederick County Annual Road Plans (Primary, Secondary, and Interstate) FREDERICK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 9/13/2010 Draft 10 Item 3: Capital Improvement Plan update Attached please find the transportation related sections of the 2010-2011 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). At this time, with the exception of updating the dates, staff is not recommending changes for the update. Staff is seeking an action on the update from the committee. 0 2011-2012 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN PROPOSED TIME -LINE September 17, 2010 Deliver departmental project request materials September 17, 2010 Planning Department staff meets with - October 15, 2010 Department/Agency directors to discuss projects and needs assessments October 15, 2010 Draft project requests, needs assessment & generalized facility map due to Planning Department November 05, 2010 Final project requests, needs assessment & generalized. facility map due to Planning Department Finance Department review of spreadsheets Appointed BOS Representatives review of requests and process (based on previous BOS direction) November 08, 2010 Comprehensive Plans and Programs Committee (CPPC) meeting with department/agency directors to review project requests December 1, 2010 Draft CIP to Planning Commission for discussion December 8, 2011 Draft CIP to Board of Supervisors for discussion January 19, 2011 Public hearing recommendation by Planning Commission of annual CIP February 9, 2011 Public hearing and adoption of the annual CIP by Board of Supervisors FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN P�k i w7fij t I ,ROM GREENWOOD MILL ELEMENTA R Y SCHOOL 2.010-2011 Fiscal Ycai- Adopted by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors February 24, 2010 Recommended by the Frederick County Planning Commission February 3, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................... l PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................... 2 Frederick County Public Schools...................................................2 Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department ............................2 Handley Regional Library........................................................ 3 Transportation Committee.......................................................... 3 Winchester Regional Airport....................................................... 3 County Administration..............................................................4 Fire& Rescue................................................................... . ..... } 2010-2011 CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP .................................................. 7 2010-2011 COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL PROJECT'S MAP........... 9 2010-2011 COUNTY PARKS AND REC. CAPITAL PROJECTS MAP ............ 11 2010-2011 TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS MAP .................................... U 2010-2011 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TABLE........................15 CIP TABLE EXPLANATIONS............................................................21 PROJECT FUNDING........................................................................21 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS ............................................... .... �, Frederick County Public Schools...................................................2 Frederick County Parks and Recreation Department ............................27 Handley Regional Library Transportation Committee...........................................................35 Winchestcr Regional Airport ....................................................... 39 County Administration.............................................................. 42 Fireand Rescue.......................................................................44 Individual Fire & Rescue Company Requests ............................47 CAPITAL IMPROVEME INTS PLAN FREDERICK COUNTY 2,010-2011 INTRODUCTION Section 15.2-2239 of the Code of Virginia assigns the responsibility for preparation of plans for capital outlays to the local Planning Commissions. The Capital hxnprovements Plan (CIP) consists of a schedule for major capital expenditures for the county for the ensuing rive years. The CIP is updated annually. Projects are removed from the plans as they are completed or as priorities change. The plan is intended to assist the Board of Supervisors in preparation of the county, budget. In addition to determining priorities for capital expenditures, the county must also ensure that projects contained within the CIP conform to the Comprehensive Policy Plan. Specifically,, the projects are reviewed with considerations regarding health, safety, and the general welfare of the public. When the CIP is adopted, it becomes a component of the Comprehensive Policy Plan. The CIP is strictly advisory; it is intended for use as a capital facilities planning document, not for requesting funding allocations. Once adopted. project priorities may change throughout the year based on changing circumstances. It is also possible that particular projects may not be funded during the year that is indicated in the CIP. The status of any project becomes increasingly uncertain the further in the future it is projected. Transportation projects are included in the CIP for a fourth year. The inclusion of transportation projects to the CIP is in no way an indication that Frederick County will be independently undertaking these projects. Funding projects will continue to come from a combination of state and federal funds, developer contributions, and revenue sharing. The 2010-2011 CIP once again emphasizes the connection between the CIP and potential proffered contributions made with rezoning projects. This effort was further reinforced through the effort of the Parks and Recreation Department and their identification of their comprehensively planned parks including community, neighborhood, and district parks. softball complex, picnic area with a shelter, and an access road with parking and trails. The soccer complex higher priority is in recognition of a partnership opportunity with a co-sponsored organization, BRYSA. The projects planned for the Clearbrook Park include, upgrade of baseball lighting, upgrading pool amenities, a new open play area, a tennis/basketball complex, and shelter with an area for stage seating. The upgrade of pool amenities at the swimming pools at both parks will include the addition of water slides and a spray ground. Handley Regional Library The Handley Regional Library continues to recommend four projects, consistent with their 2009-2010 request. The library's top priority is a parking lot expansion as well as improvements to sidewalk access at the Bowman Library. The parking lot expansion would accommodate 121 more parking than what is currently available. The library wishes to extend the sidewalks to serve residents traveling from the east to Lakeside Drive. The tIuee remaining projects request that fundincy be provided for new library branches throughout the county which include the areas of Gainesboro. Senseny/Greenwood Road, and Route 522 South, with the latter two being located within the UDA (Urban Development Area). Transportation Committee This is the fourth year the Transportation Committee is providing project requests for the CIP. Virginia State Code allows for transportation projects to be included within a locality's CIP. Funding for transportation project requests will likely come from developers and revenue sharing. Implementation of transportation projects does not take away fielding for generalized road improvements. The Transportation Committee has requested funding for twelve projects. The twelve requests include projects that entail widening of major roads, key extensions of roads that help provide better networks, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and the addition of turn lanes at current unsafe intersections. The relocation of the Senseny Road bicycle and pedestrian improvements and the Eastern Road Plan are the most recent additions to the CIP. The inclusion of an item for Eastern Road Plan Improvements once again emphasizes the connection between the CIP and potential proffered contributions made with rezoning projects which are aimed at mitigating potential transportation impacts identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Winchester Regional Airport The Airport component of the CIP was modified last year to be more consistent with the capital planning requirements of the Virginia Department of Aviation. The number of projects that are included in this CIP is similar to that of previous years, several requests represent different phases of construction of these capital improvements. 3 '441, RO is WOODD.. of RD e0 0 _@ CFDARR It RD J' SANT CLAIR R° Z CAr4"4nb I I. Ho""CL, RD BRUCEfOlS'N RD }' RrArr, p pp 'Ct 41 +� 0 Oh tLRDy 1�-ROUM1D R':LCRO ' v P9f AD `CD7 k�•I 1 �. �• VALLEY N,LE AO 2 �p�� " ;i Winchester -"%``!r � 3f/rSft, YAp 2010-2011 Capital Improvement Plan Transportation Projects 37 4 '4& CONTINUE aFgs4q�`F`q� ENGINEERING WO PLAKNNING t 1-81 EXIT SIN 307 RELOCATION 50 WARRIOR DR EXTENSION TO NEW EXIT 307 �6P° % 1YpARAlYS N. , �i� CHANNING DR SQ�,a�O* / ttRO F `•i EXTENSION TO RT50 RT11 N OF WINC WIDENING TO WV LIE /11 AAMEADJ/ BRUCETOWN RD/HOPEWELL RD p r• - lel Ll / 141/ Al 1(_AI�AGAITAMr) MITERvEvTION Stephens G'.ity qIT''�F9 s — SENSENY RD WIDENING EAST TEVIS EXTENSION q9 o' `� "ATO RDWAY RUSSELL 150 & 181 INVERLEE WAY, CONNECTION FROM t •r,".r �o�' ( Wil✓�!RT50 TO SENSENY RD FOX DR; INSTALL RT Frederick County Dept of / TURN LANE ONTO RT522 Plarn107NKantSPnxnt RENAISSANCE DR yG, —.COches!er• VP, 22601 ^.:.YFREDERICK VA US - 6 Dece—er 10.2009 90 / Senseny Rd Bike & Pedestrian Improvements 13 I'rarts of is i011 Committee Project Priori _List PRIORITY 1 Planning, Engineering, Right of Way and Construction Work for Route 37 Description: This project would be to continue work on the Eastern Route 37 extension. More specifically, to update the Environmental Impact Statement to the point of a new Record of Decision and to update the 1992 design plans to address the current aligiunent, engineering guidelines, and possible interchange lmprovemcnts. In addition, this allows for advanced engineering, right of way purchase and construction. Capital Cost: $300,000,000 -+- Justification: This project mores the County closer to completion of a transportation improvement that would benefit the entire county and surrounding localities. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 2 Interstate 81, Exit 307 Relocation Description: Construct a relocated Exit 307 interchange. Capital Cost: $60,000.000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in manyareasote Coutyand address comingdevelopment to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 3 Warrior Drive Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Route 277 where Warrior Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south and .vest to intersect with I-81 at the location of the relocated Exit 307 interchange. Capital Cost: $23.200,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in the Southern Frederick area and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 1 Channing Drive Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Senseny Road Nr -here Channing Drive intersects from the north and continuing that roadway south to intersect with Route 50 East at Independence Drive. Capital Cost: $20,600.000 35 Justification: This project has been identified in the Eastern Road Plan, and will address congestion in Eastern Frederick County and address development to the surrounding areas. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY ti Widening of Route l 1 North to the West Viiginia State Line Description: Improve Route II to a divided 4 and 6 -lane facility as detailed in the Eastern Road Plan. Capital Cost: $47,800,000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion over a large area of the County and address development to the surrounding area. This project improves the safety for the traveling public by reducing congestion and improving the flow of traffic. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 6 l3rucetown Road/Hope-well Road Alignment and Intersection Improvements Description: Realign Brucetow'n Road to meet tlopew-ell Road at Route ll. lmprovernents to this intersection will address comprehensive planned development's traffic generation in the area. Capital Cost: $3,000,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on the Route 11 corridor. The location is identified by joint planning efforts between the county and VDOT. Construction Schedule: 'IBD PRIORITY 7 Sensen,yr Road Widening Description: NViden Senseny Road to a 4 -lane divided roadway. This project is not dependent upon, but is being coordinated writh the implementation of Route 37, Channing Drive, and development in the area. Capital Cost: $22.800,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will have significant impact on Eastern Frederick County. This project is identified in the adopted Eastern Road Plan. Construction Schedule: "IBD 36 PRIORITY S East Tevis Street Extension Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway beginning at Route 522 and going west approximately 0.2 miles to connect to the road netNvork being constructed by the Russell 150 development. Capital Cost: $2.600.000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion in many areas of the County and address development to the surrounding area. The location is as identified by joint planning efforts between the county, VDOT, and the developer. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 9 Inverlee Way Description: Construct a 4 -lane divided roadway begin ling at Senseny Road and going south to Route 50 East. This project is being planned in conjunction vvith improvements to Senseny Road and surrounding development. Capital Cost: $10.200.000 Justification: This is a regional transportation improvement that will address congestion and provide an additional needed link between Senseny Road and Route 50 East. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORITY 10 Fox Drive Description: Add additional turning lane(s) to Fox Drive where it intersects with Route 522 North. Capital Cost: $250,000 Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at this intersection. Construction Schedule: TBD PRIORI'T'Y 11 Renaissance Drive Description: Construct a connector road between Route 11 and Shadv Elm Drive. Capital Cost: $2.000.000 Y Justification: This is a transportation improvement that will address congestion at key points along Route l 1 and Apple Valley Dr.. This project is identified in Secondary Road Improvements Plan. Construction Schedule: TBD 37 PRIORITY 12 Revenue Sharing Description: Plan to prepare for future revenue sharing applications. Capital Cost: $3,000,000 Justification: This project is intended to prelaare the county for future revenue shann" applications that may or may not include developer contributions. Construction Schedule: N/A PRIORITY 13 Senseny Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Description: This project will construct bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Senseny Road fi-om Greenwood Road to the 1-81 crossover. Capital Cost: $2,000,000 Justification: This project will improve pedestrian safety along a corridor surrounded by residential development and centered upon the Senseny Road Elementary School. Construction Schedule: N/A PRIORITY 14 Frederick County Eastern Road Plan Description: This project is intended to address all of the planned transportation improvements in the County Comprehensive Plan, Eastern Road Plan that aye not noted individually above. Capital Cost: TBD Justification: This project prepares the county for future development by addressing the projects needed to support that development in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Construction Schedule: N/A 38 Winchester Reg imU41Airpop�t Proiect_Priority List PRIORITY 1 Rehab R/W 14/32, Upgrade Airfield Lighting llesign Description: Design of Runxvay Rehab and Lighting Upgrade. Capital Cost: $10.000,000 Local Cost: $200.000 Justification: This design project involves the rehabilitation of runway 14-32 to renew the life of the existing pavement. Also included is an upgrade to the rumvay lighting comprised of new high intensity runway lights and the installation of a new four box PAPI, «Nhich provides a greater accuracy for pilots on final approach to the runway. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 10-11 PRIORITY 2 Land Acquisition — Bufflick Road — Parcel 50 Description: Acquisition of parcel located along Bufflick Road. Property is included in the 20 Year Master Plan. Capital Cost: $225,000 Local Cost: $4,500 Justification: This project is necessary as the identified parcels are located within the Airport's FAR Part 77 primary surface and/or approach surface. In addition. several of the residential parcels are located inside tyle FAA's projected DNL 65 noise contour. The FAA considers residential use within the noise contour non -compatible with airport operations. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 11-12 PRIORITY 3 Land Acquisition - Bufflick Road — Parcels 51, & 52 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire Parcels 51 and 52 on Bufflick Road. These parcels are critical because a portion of each is located within the airport primary surface, and the structures on the property are located closest to the runway. Capital Cost: $295,000 Local Cost: $5,900 Justification: Parcels 51 and 52 lie within the runway's primary surface at the Winchester Regional Airport. Structures on the property are also located closed to the runway. The airport has completed all preliminary efforts (i.e. appraisal, sur-vc} s. EDDA, etc.) and has made its initial offer along with negotiations and AN -ill act to complete this transaction to ultimately improve safety conditions at the airport. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY I 1-12 39 I PRIORI'T'Y 4 Taxiway A Relocation — Phase I & 11 Design Description: The relocation of Taxiway A is part of the overall Airport upgrade to meet safety design standards for a Group III airport. This relocation will improve the serviceability and safety of the Airport in regards to ground operations for larger aircraft. Due to the complex task of relocating the entire taxiway, the project has been broken down into two phases — Phase I will begin at the 32 approach end and continue to the terminal building midfield. Phase I1 will continue from the terminal building to the approach end of runway 14. Capital Cost: $200.000 Local Cost: $4.000 Justification: The relocation of Taxiiway A is necessary to increase the Airport's ability to accommodate larger aircrall. This project also will improve the serviceability of the Airport in regards to ground traffic. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 10-11 PRIORITY 5 Land Acquisition — Bufflick Road — Parcels 54 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire an additional parcel on Bufflick Road identified on the Airport property map as Parcel 54. This parcel is critical because a portion is located within the airport primary surface, and the structure on the property is located closest to the runway. Capital Cost: $315,790 Local Cost: $6,316 Justification: The additional parcel on Bufflick Road lies within the runway's primary surface at the Winchester Regional Airport. Structures on the property are also located close to the runway. The airport has completed all preliminary efforts (i.e. appraisal. surveys. L'DDA, etc.) and has made its initial oiler along with negotiations and will act to complete this transaction to ultimately improve safety conditions at the airport. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 12-13 PRIORITY 6 Taxiway A Relocation — Phase I & II Construction Description: The relocation of Taxiway A is part of the overall Airport upgrade to meet safety design standards for a Group III airport. This relocation will improve the serviceability and safety of the Airport in regards to ground operations for larger aircraft. Due to the complex task of relocating the entire taxiNvay, the project has been broken down into two phases — Phase 1 will begin at the 32 approach end and continue to the 40 terminal building Midfield. Phase 11 will continue from the terminal building to the approach end of runway 14. Capital Cost: $3,684.210 Local Cost: $73.684 Justification: The relocation of Taxiway A is necessary to increase the Airport's ability to accommodate larger aircraft. This project also Neill improve the serviceability of the Airport in regards to ground traffic. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 12-13 PR>IORITY '7 Land Acquisition — Buffliek Road — Parcel 67 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire this parcel on Bufilick Road identified on the Airport property map as Parcel 67. This parcel is critical because a portion of each is located within the airport primary surface, and the structures on the property are located closest to the runway. Capital Cost: $263,158 Local Cost: $10,526 Justification: This parcel on Buffliek Road lies within the runway's primary surface at the Winchester Regional Airport. Structures on the property are also located closed to the runNvay. The airport has completed all preliminary efforts (i.e. appraisal, surveys, EDDA, etc.) and has made its initial older along with negotiations and Nv°ill act to complete this transaction to ultimately improve safety conditions at the airport. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 13-14 PRIORITY 8 Land Acquisition — Buf'flick Road — Parcels 64 and 65 Description: The Winchester Regional Airport Authority proposes to acquire two additional parcels on Bufflick Road identified on the Airport property map as Parcels 64 and 65. These parcels are critical because a portion of each is located within the airport primary surface, and the structures on the property are located closest to the runway. Capital Cost: $526.316 Local Cost: $5.263 Justification: The two additional parcels on Bufflick Road lie «vithin the runway's primary surface at the Winchester Regional Airport. Structures on the property are also located closed to the runway. The airport has completed all preliminary efforts (i.e. appraisal, surveys. EDDA, etc.) and has made its initial offer along with negotiations and will act to complete this transaction to ultimately improve safety conditions at the airport. Construction Schedule: Completion in FY 14-I5 41 Cotin Administration Pr oject_Priori List PRIORITY l Gainesboro Convenience Site Relocation Description: The relocation of the Gainesboro citizens' convenience site to property located within the Gainesboro community is planned for the 09/10 fiscal year. Remaining design work will be completed during the current fiscal year. A fenced, accessible two - acre site will be constructed along North Frederick Pike in close proximity to the existing site on Old Gainesboro .Road. 'I'his project will require several months to complete and include fencing, earthwork, a retaining wall, electric, lighting, paving and landscaping. Capital Cost: $452,625 Justification: Approximately 4.000 residents are served by the Gainesboro facility. "The refuse site serves a wide geographic area from Gainesboro westward to the Cross Junction, Whitacre and Reynolds Store communities. Construction Schedule: Start in FY 10-11 PRIORITY 2 Gore Refuse Site Relocation/Expansion Description: The project will expand refuse collection capacity at Gore by installing a surplus trash compactor. With the relocation of the Gainesboro site and purchase of new equipment, there will be an available compactor. installation of a compactor at Gore will drive down collection costs at the site where trash is now collected in 10 8 -yard boxes. In order to accomplish this, and account for improved traffic flow and the construction of necessary concrete walls, the site will be expanded onto an adjoining parcel already owned by the county. Capital Cost: $437.150 Justification: This project would also provide much-needed capacity during heavy flow times such as weekends and holidays. All 10 containers now on site fill to capacity during Saturday afternoons and during the Sunday shift when up to 189 vehicles visit the facility. A 40 -yard roll -off is placed at the site during the Christmas holidays to provide for increased trash generation. An upgraded site would meet the future solid waste demands of a growing community. Construction Schedule: Start in FY 11-12 PRIORITY 3 General Government Capital )Expenditures Description: 'Phis ne«f project consists of a revolving fiind in the amount of $1,000,000 for the benefit of General Governmental Capital Expenditures. It is the intention of this capital expenditure fund to be for the purpose of purchasing capital equipment for governmental agencies and to allow for improvements to general governmental facilities. Such expenditures may be less than the established $100,000 departmental threshold. It 42 was determined that the inclusion of such a project Nvould be beneficial in ensuring that this significant capital expense is identified in the County's capital planning and budget process. This project is for the benefit of the County Governmental Entities participating in the CIP but does not include individual Volunteer Fire and Rescue Companies. Capital Cost: $1.000.000 Justification: The inclusion of this capital expenditure fund for the purpose of purchasing capital equipment for governmental agencies and to allow for improvements to reneral governmental facilities will enable the County to meet the requirements of the Code of Virginia with regards to the collection and disbursement of` cash proffers accepted on behalf of the governn ental entities. Construction Schedule: N/A 43 • L: • Item 4: Route 522 South Draft Attached, please find the most recent version of the Route 522 South draft report and staff's comments that have been submitted on it. You will recall that at the last Transportation Committee meeting, we had the update of the design standards. We are now in the phase of giving feedback on the main body of the report. Staff is seeking any additional feedback that may be forthcoming from the committee. This feedback will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors and the MPO. 5 John eisi-:00 —rom: John Bishop anr: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 11:47 AM To: 'Karen Taylor' Cc: John Bishop Subject: RE: Draft - Route 522 Corridor Study 09-13-2010 Comments Attachments: image001.gif Thanks Karen; I know it's not your fault that we didn't get this till yesterday afternoon, but it made me have to rush a bit to make sure my comments got out before tomorrow's Policy Committee meeting, so I reserve the right to make additions. 1. Page 2-3 and associated graphic on page 4. The future intersection of Tevis and 522 was supposed to be added. 2. Page 5 technically the portion of 522 that is minor arterial is where it heads south from the intersection with 50. Millwood Pike is a principle arterial per VDOT classification. 3. Page 7, paragraph 1 says Frederick road when I think it means to say Frederick County 4, Figures 2.3,2.4,2.5,2.6, would be improved by road/intersection labels. Same for 3.6,3.7,3.8,3.9,3.10 5. The roadway levels of service shown on page 20 may be confusing to some. They will wonder why the intersections have marginal or poor levels of service when the corridor is good. Perhaps some discussion of the differences between measurement of corridor and intersection levels of service would be useful. 6. Page 23 notes that pedestrian facilities are 'lacking in the more rural sections of the study area'. This wording indicates a deficiency when, in truth, you don't really need dedicated pedestrian facilities in the rural areas. Multiuse paths or something of the sort would be desirable. 7. Page 24 notes the lack of bicycle facilities along 522. Frederick County's comprehensive plan and the MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Study call for bicycle facilities in this area so while it's clear that there aren't any there now, it's important to know that we are planning for it and as properties develop (such as the walmart coming to the intersection of Tasker and 522) the plan is being implemented. 8. Freight section does a good job of pointing out that 522 has significant truck percentages due to commercial/industrial and the inland port, not to mention the potential for cut through and scale avoiding traffic. Combine this with the potential for even further increase via expandability of the inland port and new development as allowed in local comprehensive plans and a case can be made that removal of the signage on Route 7 and Route 340 in Clarke County that directs inland port traffic to take Route 7 to 1-81 would create a positive impact on Route 7 , 1-81, and Route 277 in Frederick County. This would allow vehicles that are currently being directed away from Route 340 to use 340 and thus remove them from the above noted congested roadways. I know the report states that inland port is not a huge overall percentage of the trucks on 522 is does account for as much as 'several hundred truck trips per day'. When you consider that a decent percentage of these may be using 7,1-81, and 277 and improvement could be made to those roadways by allowing those trucks to use 340. 9. On page 29, 1 know the access management regulations state 1,760 feet, but just say 1/3 mile. Makes more sense to people. 10. Also on page 29, before noting a safety issue such as puddling or poor drainage, please verify with VDOT. I expect Jerry would be able to confirm or refute this. 11. Page 32, Frederick County has one Urban Development Area and one Sewer and Water Service Area. Reword from the plural language. 12. Page 36, bullet 4 discusses the Tevis street connection and bridge into Winchester as a revenue sharing project. A portion of this improvement is revenue sharing, but the bridge, connection to airport road, and connection to the south are funded via a community development authority (CDA) which is known as the Russell 150 CDA. Only the connection heading northeast from Russell 150 to the intersection with 522 is revenue sharing. 1 13. Future conditions section which starts on page 37 still sloes not include the Tei✓is intersection with 522. This was among our primary issues with the first draft and its exclusion throws the results for the Airport Rd/522 intersection into question.. 14. Page 47, the potential inland port in rnartinsburg would not relieve pressure on the Virginia inland port. They are separate operations under separate ownerships. 15. Page 4?8, the county comprehensive plan already calls for the 6 laning that is being recommended. Worth noting. 16. Regarding the design principles I would just reiterate what has been previously communicated. a. Members of our Transportation Committee and Board of Supervisors feel that a number of the design recommendations are not realistic. They have particular concern over the median plantings. b. Members of the Board of Supervisors feel that some of the language is vague and it is difficult to determine if a suggestion is being made for 522 itself or a connecting street. Depending upon which is being referred to, their opinions may vary. Thanks John John A. Bishop, AICP Deputy Director - Transportation Frederick County Planning & Development 107 North Kent St, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 Ph: 540-665-5651 F: 540-665-6395 j bishop@co. frederick.va.us From: Karen Taylor [mailto:kltaylor@shentel.net] Seat: Monday, September 13, 2010 4:51 PM To: John Bishop; Eric Lawrence; Kris Tierney; Patrick Barker; 'Tom Hoy'; 'Perry Eisenach'; 'Tim Youmans'; 'Jim Deskins'; 'Renee Wells'; 'Jerry Copp'; 'Short, Terry'; okvmanuel@comcast.net; 'Pollock, Kenneth (DRPT)'; 'Brian Henshaw' Wit:.: 'Karen Taylor' Subject: Draft - Route 522 Corridor Study 09-13-2010 Below is the link for the Draft Route 522 Corridor Study. Pleasa review and let me know as soon as possible any comments you inay have. Baker will be presenting the draft to the Policy Hoard this Wednesday. Thanks, Kamen Froro: jmasinick@mbakercorp.com[rnai!to:jmasinick@mbakercorp.com] Sergi: Monday, September 13, 2010 3:33 PM 2 DRAFT ROUTE 522 MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR STUDY September 2010 Prepared by - Michael Baker Jr., Inc. With assistance from: EiN A1S;5A�!CE PLANN+N� Disclaimer: The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s) who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Virginia Department of Transportation and/or the Planning District Commission. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. VDOT acceptance of this report as evidence of fulfillment of the objectives of this planning study does not constitute endorsement/approval of the need for any recommended improvements nor does it constitute approval of their location and design or a commitment to fund any such improvements. Additional project level environmental impact assessments and/or studies of alternatives may be necessary. TABLE OF CIDNTEN 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. I Purposeand Need........................................................................................................... 1 StudyArea and Corridor................................................................................................. 2 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................... 5 ExistingGeometry.......................................................................................................... ExistingZoning............................................................................................................... 7 ExistingTraffic Volumes................................................................................................ 9 Existing Operating Conditions......................................................................................I I Safety............................................................................................................................21 Existing Multimodal Facilities...................................................................................... 23 29 OtherRoadway Deficiencies........................................................................................ 3.0 PROJECTED FUTURE CONDITIONS........................................................... 31 2035 Future Land Use................................................................................................... 31 2035 Traffic Forecasts Methodology............................................................................ 35 Forecast 2035 Future Traffic Volumes......................................................................... 37 2035 Traffic Deficiencies............................................................................................. 38 Other Modes and Summary.......................................................................................... 46 4.0 ROUTE 522 CORRIDOR'. RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... 48 Route 522 Corridor - Roadway Capacity Recommendations ....................................... 48 Route 522 Corridor - Intersection Recommendations.................................................. 49 Route 522 Corridor — Other Capacity Improvement Recommendations ...................... 59 Land Use Principles/Context Zone Summary............................................................... 63 Other Growth Management Techniques....................................................................... 68 Route 522 Corridor — Multimodal Recommendations.................................................. 70 ProjectPrioritization..................................................................................................... 74 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 LISOF T FIGURES Figure1-1: Study Area Map.............................................................................................. 4 Figure 2-1: Typical Sections along Route 522.................................................................. 5 Figure2-2: Existing Zoning............................................................................................... 8 Figure 2-3: Existing Traffic Conditions (1 of 4).............................................................. 15 Figure 2-4: Existing Traffic Conditions (2 of 4).............................................................. 16 Figure 2-5: Existing Traffic Conditions (3 of 4).............................................................. 17 Figure 2-6: Existing Traffic Conditions (4 of 4).............................................................. 18 Figure 2-7: Existing Sidewalk Locations......................................................................... 23 Figure 2-8: Virginia Inland Port and Surrounding Region .............................................. 27 Figure 2-9: Example of Median Crossover Not Meeting VDOT Regulation .................. 30 Figure 2-10: Example of Commercial Access Not Meeting VDOT Regulation ............. 30 Figure 3-1: City of Winchester Future Land Use............................................................ 31 Figure 3-2: Frederick County Future Land Use............................................................... 32 Figure 3-3: Frederick County Development Areas.......................................................... 32 Figure 3-4: Airport Support Area.................................................................................... 33 Figure 3-5: Future Land Use at Double Tollgate............................................................. 33 Figure 3-6: Warren County Future Land Use along US 522 ........................................... 34 Figure 3-7: Future Year 2035 Traffic Conditions (1 of 4) ............................................... 42 Figure 3-8: Future Year 2035 Traffic Conditions (2 of 4) ............................................... 43 Figure 3-9: Future Year 2035 Traffic Conditions (3 of 4) ............................................... 44 Figure 3-10: Future Year 2035 Traffic Conditions (4 of 4) .............................................. 45 Figure 4-1: Conceptual Sketch of Grade Separation....................................................... 60 Figure 4-2: MPO Vision Plan Projects............................................................................ 60 Figure4-3: Context Zone Map........................................................................................ 64 Table 2.1: Historic Traffic Counts and Growth Rates ....................................................... 9 Table 2.2: Existing Route 522 Traffic Counts................................................................. 10 Table 2.3: Existing Conditions Level of Service Summary ............................................ 13 Table 2.4: Existing Roadway Level of Service Summary ............................................... 20 Table 2.5: Intersection Crash Rates Summary................................................................. 22 Table 2.6: Roadway Link Crash Rates Summary............................................................ 22 Table 3.1: Horizon Year 2035 Future Roadway Traffic Volumes .................................. 37 Table 3.2: Year 2035 Future Conditions Level of Service Summary .............................. 40 Table 3.3: Future Roadway Level of Service Summary .................................................. 46 ii DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 1.INTRODUCTION Purpose and weed The Route 522 Corridor, spanning from the southeastern section of the City of Winchester to north of the Town of Front Royal, is a corridor of mixed land use, including areas of residential, retail and rural development. The northern section of the Route 522 Study Corridor, near Interstate 81, is largely developed with mostly retail and some residential uses. The central section, including southeastern Frederick County, western Clarke County, and northern Warren County, is rural in nature with low-density rural residential uses with pockets of retail and industrial land uses. The southern section of the Route 522 Corridor, near Interstate 66, is again largely developed with mostly retail land use and is one of the most rapidly developing sections of the corridor. This is a cooperative project between the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (NSVRC), the Winchester -Frederick MPO (Win -Fred) and the localities of the City of Winchester, Frederick County, Clarke County, and Warren County to analyze existing and future planned development and travel demand along the corridor to address future transportation needs. This study is a multimodal corridor study that analyzes and documents the many modes of transportation along this corridor, including freight movement via trucks, area transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. In particular, this study will serve the following purposes: • Collect highway performance measures (i.e. traffic counts, accident data, congestion/delay studies, recent traffic impact analysis, etc.) to determine the operational efficiency of the corridor. • Determine current access patterns and volumes of truck traffic along Route 522. Freight movement via trucks to the Virginia Inland Port will be studied to determine access needs and /or signage and routing improvements. + Information on safety will be gathered from previous studies in the corridor and field observation to determine short-term and long-term safety needs in the corridor. • Access management and corridor preservation recommendations will be determined for the corridor that address the needs of adjacent existing and potential future land uses. • Coordination of land use issues will be analyzed to determine future growth trends in the corridor and to assess the need for additional land use controls and DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 ordinances in the corridor that will minimize the transportation impacts of future growth. • In addition, the potential for additional transit routes, bicycle and pedestrian facilities to be located within this corridor will be identified. The development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities will include not only routes along the Route 522 Corridor, but also look at needs to link bicycle and pedestrian generators along the corridor, such as major or planned residential development to activity centers or schools. New potential Park and ride lot locations will be determined as per the MPO Long -Range Plan. • Identify projected deficiencies on Route 522 for build -out future conditions based on future traffic growth and anticipated land use changes. • Provide concepts for roadway and intersection improvements and access management to address the identified deficiencies along the Route 522 Corridor. This study will provide the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (NSVRC), the Winchester -Frederick MPO (Win -Fred), the localities and VDOT with a tool to help identify corridor needs as future land use driven development advances throughout the Route 522 Corridor and surrounding areas. Study Area and Corridor The Study Area is located along Route 522 from S. Pleasant Valley Road in the City of Winchester to south of Interstate 66 in Warren County, covering a distance of over 10 miles. The study area includes the following 22 intersections, which were analyzed as a part of this study. • Rte 522 (Millwood Ave) & S Pleasant Valley Rd Rte 522 (Millwood Ave) & Frontage Rd • Rte 522 (Millwood Ave) & 1-81 SB • Rte 522 (Millwood Pke) & 1-81 NB / Front Royal Pke • Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Costello Drive Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Airport Rd Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Papermill Rd Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Macedonia Church Road © Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Tasker Rd © Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Moranto Manor Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Lord Fairfax Hwy (Rte 277 & Rte 340) Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Lake Frederick Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Rocky Glen Dr Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke / Winchester Rd) & Ashby Station Rd Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Fairground Rd 2 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Toray Dr ® Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Rockland Rd Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Reliance Rd Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Country Club Rd (Townsend Dr) Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & 1-66 EB • Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & 1-66 WB 0 Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Riverton (North) Figure 1-1 provides a detailed map of the study area and analyzed intersections and illustrates the location of the area in the northwestern Virginia region. DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 T,. Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study From IVliI Iwood Avenue & S Pleasant Valley Road (Winchester) to Riverton Road (Fant RoyaI) $1' _rye {�� "in Pxiflt9Y eiWd I;JL�t�Prtl�j' S i A�ngl E q;dl)p!i F'. ayPnr N°sdnia r �`'� vI 4n�dx tilrtt' `i � / 5 f' M, 41', ��y' �- • _a .. r i, of This chapter identifies existing deficiencies and presents the traffic operating conditions along Route 522. A wide range of potential environmental, cultural, and social resources are located within the study area and should be considered fully in any subsequent National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) studies for any federally funded improvement project. This study, however, focused on specific conditions and resources along the corridor in order to determine individual recommendations and identify any major constraints to their implementation. Existing Geometry Figure 2-1: Typical Sections along Route 522 Route 522 (Millwood Avenue and Apple Blossom Drive) in the City of Winchester, from S. Pleasant Valley Road to Jubal Early Drive, is classified as a Minor Arterial roadway. Curb and gutter are present along this section of Route 522. Right of way varies from 70 - 80 feet in this segment. Route 522 continues on Jubal Early Drive, east of Apple Blossom Drive. This segment, through Interstate 81 and into Frederick County, is classified as a Principal Arterial roadway. This segment has four lanes, features curb and gutter, a raised center median, and 80 — 90 feet of right-of-way. Right-of-way expands at the interchange area. In Frederick County, east of Interstate 81, Route 522/50/17 (Millwood Pike) is classified once again as a Minor Arterial roadway. Route 522 splits off from Route 50/17 and continues north/south as Front Royal Pike. This roadway segment from I- 81 to south of Route 644 (Papermill Road) is five lanes, two lanes in each direction and a center bi-directional turn lane. Right-of- way ranges from 60 - 100 feet in this area. A speed limit of 35 mph is posted from Route 522117150, west of later rte 89 Route 52Z north of Double Tollgate Route 52Z north of Interstate 66 5 DRAFT- Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 Millwood Avenue (Route 50117) to north of Bufflick Road and 45 mph from north of Bufflick Road to Airport Road. From south of Route 644 to the Frederick County f Clarke County line, Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) is a four -lane divided roadway with a raised center median and varying right- of-way from 100 — 180 feet. A two mile segment of Route 522 (Stonewall Jackson Highway) runs through Clarke County and intersects Routes 277 and 340 (Lord Fairfax Highway), known as the Double Tollgate area. Throughout this two-mile segment, Route 522 continues as a four -lane divided highway with a raised center median and right-of-way varying from 150 — 190 feet. A speed limit of 45 mph is posted in the Double Tollgate area, roughly 900 feet to the north and south of the US 5221 Lord Fairfax Highway (US 3401277) intersection. In Warren County, from the Clarke County line to south of Interstate 66, Route 522 (Winchester Road) continues mostly as a four -lane divided highway with right-of-way ranging from 130 — 270 feet. A short segment of Route 522 becomes five -lane (two southbound, three northbound) from Interstate 66 to north of Country Club Road. This section features curb and gutter with right-of-way ranging from 130 — 370 feet. As part of this study, 22 existing intersections were analyzed for capacity and safety deficiencies. The location of the existing intersections and their existing lane configuration are shown with the analysis presented later in this chapter. 6 DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 Existing Zoning The US 522 Corridor has a wide range of zoning classifications along it, including residential, agricultural, commercial and industrial zoned properties. In the northern section of the study corridor, in the City of Winchester and Frederick County, US 522 (Millwood Avenue, Millwood Pike, Front Royal Pike) consists of Highway Commercial zoned properties mixed with a Commercial Industrial district. Areas within the City of Winchester and Frederick Road, south of Costello Drive, are highly developed as the Apple Blossom Mall, Delco Plaza and other big box retail outlets are located along this section of US 522. South of Costello Drive, in Frederick County, the corridor becomes much less developed, as parcels are predominantly residential or agricultural zoned properties with a few commercial or business zoned properties sparsely located along the corridor. Further south along the corridor in Clarke County, all properties are zoned AOC (Agricultural, Open Space, Conservation), with the exception of a small Commercial Highway zoned district at the junction of US 522 and Lord Fairfax Highway (US 340). Properties in Warren County primarily consist of Industrial and Commercial zoned parcels, with a small pocket of residential zoned properties existing at the US 522 intersection with Reliance Road. The industrial zoned property is located on the east side of US 522 and is the site of the Virginia Inland Port, while the commercial properties are located on the west side of US 522. A map of the existing zoning along the study corridor is shown in Figure 2-2. 7 DRAFT- Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 'ut II r tt' i�l)I-fir Zoning By Locality Winches'er c tral D D'ssol CD'HignwaY Commercial of^.Ina56 . Coucalor, Inst uwn .,rd PuAi, IJse Disinut 1'. r +ire ma, _.: Heallh5 ces Dleutct 1-' - leleelCalGe Hirer E 'un lion Ciatrlcl- aYIrnensiv I Lsl�l Dlsl�tcr `�, y `Y;. Ln -ea c Ilo tct 't E Hgn D111,11ty Re'—Ad Ea 11e: , - ` Limed Hi DensityC stl i ID&,tot 4 &a s-•' 3 R I_—De iy east Dst-t '�yj W-11De s Y P qx' Dlsu'lot tjq� KF Fld De,eli Resoentlal Bob-, D�suict Re Ine rol Olt-Dillau v Delay D nan,a r Warren County f O Agricullurel A r ctrnle:cial � s"ci / „� Irw steal 1 � • R-1 His Doi nliel �.�� '� . ban Pesido-1 _. C Frederick County J Ag"bi nm -1 Bl (3osiress, Neight:o.—I Dislricll B2 (B s s Gee S, Dl s t) -a 1 - ' •: ® es lR s IndU9 ial i, 1,MCMI EM IC6, v FIE(Mg -Ed cal on Dlst .,, Ilndu,iiial, Lon! DtaTdct) Mc (Ird 1'al G nei-1 Dis,rlct) CMS ;F4a' alSuPPon QErcl( Ii [Mobile Home Community DiS1 int) % RP Resider'.tial Penorin,t— Dis Bel, - - -- - F14 Resdenoal Planned Com Ity Dls(i LAJ __ ti' i; PE'R,,dentel Recreatcnal Co—ity D1101etl FY, (R,,: Aree Dlstnot) Clarke County C j P.00 !Agn-P.dml, Open SF— Conseils" -,� 6 IBusinecsJ - , G' (wn I Higrn ay( C� (Cor e c sl Neighlwltocdt u :.r �j,J N PE��,.)�', r��G {'L f'_I�!(.I"�:y Y-F.F VR 0 a 12 1 2 Existing Traffic Volumes Historic traffic counts were obtained from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) traffic count database. Table 2.1 documents Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes from 2005-2008. Average annual growth rates along the Route 522 study area segments have ranged from -3.5% to 2.7%. The majority of the segments have experienced a decrease in traffic volumes since 2005. The weakened economy in recent years has had an impact and reduced traffic volumes not just along the Route 522 Corridor, but on a state-wide and nation-wide level as well. Table 2.1 also shows heavy truck percentage on each segment of the Route 522 study area. Connecting Interstates 66 and 81, the Route 522 Corridor is home to the Virginia Inland Port (VIP). VIP handles 20,000 containers annually, generating several hundred truck trips utilizing Route 522. As shown in the table, the heavy truck percentage is between 3% and 5% outside of the Interstate 66 and 81 interchanges. Between the interchanges, the truck traffic ranges from 14% to 17% of the daily traffic volume. TAMP 7 1 • W:zfnrir Traffir Cniints and Growth Rates Source: Virginia uepar[men[ OT I ranspoaaUarl 1mu uumul - I Ialnu vara Traffic counts were conducted along the study area corridor to supplement existing traffic count data obtained from previous studies in the corridor. Pneumatic tube counts and intersection turn movement counts were conducted in early June 2009. Tube counts were conducted at six locations along Route 522. Four locations featured classification counts to record heavy truck percentages for comparison against the 9 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 VDOT AADT Average Locality Roadway Location Heavy Annual Growth 2005 2006 2007 2008 Trucks Rate Route 522 S Pleasant Valley Rd to Jubal 13,000 13,000 14,000 13,000 3% 0.0% City of (Millwood Ave) Early Dr Winchester Route 522 Jubal Early or to -81 26,000 25,000 28,000 25,000 3% -1.3% (Millwood Ave) Route 522 1-81 to Millwood Pike (50) 35,000 35,000 38,000 37,000 5% 1.9% (Millwood Pike) Route 522 Millwood Pike (50) to 15,000 15,000 16,000 14,000 15% -2.2% Frederick (Front Royal Pike) Papermill Rd (644) Co Route 522 Papermill Rd (644) to 16,000 16,000 16,000 15,000 14 % 2.1 (Front Royal Pike) Macedonia Church Rd (642) Route 522 Macedonia Church Rd (642) 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14% 0.0% (Front Royal Pike) to Clarke Co CL Route 522 Frederick Cc CL to Double 14,000 14,000 14,000 13,000 14% -2.4% (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) Tollgate Clarke Co Route 522 Double Tollgate to Warren Cc 19,000 19,000 19,000 17,000 17% -3.5% (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) CL Route 522 NCL Warren Cc to Reliance 19,000 19,000 19,000 17,000 16% -3.5% (Winchester Rd) Rd (627) Warren Co Route 522 Reliance Rd (627) to 1-66 22,000 22,000 22,000 22,000 15% 0.0% (Winchester Rd) Route 5221-66 to NCL Front Royal 25,000 25,000 25,000 27,000 4% 2.7% (Winchester Rd) Source: Virginia uepar[men[ OT I ranspoaaUarl 1mu uumul - I Ialnu vara Traffic counts were conducted along the study area corridor to supplement existing traffic count data obtained from previous studies in the corridor. Pneumatic tube counts and intersection turn movement counts were conducted in early June 2009. Tube counts were conducted at six locations along Route 522. Four locations featured classification counts to record heavy truck percentages for comparison against the 9 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 VDOT data. The other two count locations were conducted as volume -only tube counts. These Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes were compared to the VDOT Statewide Planning System 2008 counts and are shown in Table 2.2. Both the tube counts and heavy truck percentages are similar to the 2008 VDOT data. As shown in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2, the heavy truck percentage ranges from 14-17% on the US 522 Corridor between Interstate 64 and Interstate 81 and are considered high. Truck percentages north of the Interstate 81 interchange and south of the Interstate 64 interchange are considered low to moderate, ranging from 3-6%. Tnhla 9 9- Fxictinn G ngitp 522 Traffic Counts Turning movement counts were also conducted in June 2009 at key intersections along the Route 522 Corridor. Recent traffic studies were review and new turn movement counts were conducted to supplement the existing data throughout the study area. Based on this data existing AM and PM peak hour turn movement volumes were developed for the study area intersections. The AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are shown with the analysis results in the next section. 10 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 2009 AM 2009 PM 2008 2009 Peak Peak Locality Roadway Location AADT ADT Hour Hour Heavy (VDOT) (Count) Volume Volume Trucks Between Apple Route 522 Blossom Dr and 13,000 15,200 895 1,255 (Millwood Ave) Pleasant Valley Rd City of Winchester oute 522 Between Apple Blossom Dr and N/A 8,100 603 651 6.8% (Millwood Ave) Jubal Early Dr Route 522 North of 14,000 21,600 1,198 1,681 (Front Royal Pike) Costello Dr Frederick Co Route 522 North of Double 14,000 13,800 875 1,145 17.0% (Front Royal Pike) Tollgate Route 522 North of County 22,000 21,700 1,316 1,726 16.6% (Winchester Rd) Club Rd Warren Co 2 South of 1-66 27,000 29,700 1,892 2,555 6.5% (WRoute Rd) Turning movement counts were also conducted in June 2009 at key intersections along the Route 522 Corridor. Recent traffic studies were review and new turn movement counts were conducted to supplement the existing data throughout the study area. Based on this data existing AM and PM peak hour turn movement volumes were developed for the study area intersections. The AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are shown with the analysis results in the next section. 10 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Existing Operating Conditions Capacity analyses were conducted for the existing conditions at each of the 22 key intersections along Route 522 using Synchro 7.0 software. The key output from the capacity analyses is level of service for each intersection. Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of the operating conditions of a traffic stream on a transportation facility. There are six LOS categories (LOS A through LOS F) used to rate facilities. LOS A represents the best operating conditions with no congestion and LOS F the worst with heavy congestion. LOS C is desirable but LOS D is considered an acceptable LOS in most urban and suburban areas. The LOS ratings are based on ranges in delay, shown below. 95th percentile queue lengths are also reported, which can help identify insufficient turn lane storage. Existing Conditions intersection LOS and 95th percentile queue length results from the Synchro software analysis are shown in Table 2.3. Existing traffic conditions, including existing turn movement counts, lane geometry, and movement LOS, are shown in Figure 2-3 through Figure 2-6. Fifteen existing signalized intersections were investigated along with seven stop - controlled intersections. Currently, fourteen of the fifteen signalized intersections are operating with an acceptable overall intersection LOS D or better in both the AM and PM peak hour. The following signalized intersections are currently operating with an overall intersection LOS E or LOS F in either the AM or PM peak hour. Intersection 3 — Route 522 (Millwood Pike) @ 1-81 Southbound Ramps — This intersection is currently operating at LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. The southbound approach (1-81 Southbound Ramp) is currently operating at LOS F in the AM peak hour and LOS E in the PM peak hour. This poor approach level of service contributes to the overall intersection LOS E in the AM peak hour. All other approaches at this intersection are operating at an acceptable LOS D or better in the AM and PM peak hours. 11 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Signalized ®slay (sec) Stop - Controlled Delay (sec) A 0-10 0-10 B > 10 to 20 > 10 to 15 C > 20 to 35 > 15 to 25 D >35to55 >25to35 E >55to80 >35to50 F > 80 > 50 95th percentile queue lengths are also reported, which can help identify insufficient turn lane storage. Existing Conditions intersection LOS and 95th percentile queue length results from the Synchro software analysis are shown in Table 2.3. Existing traffic conditions, including existing turn movement counts, lane geometry, and movement LOS, are shown in Figure 2-3 through Figure 2-6. Fifteen existing signalized intersections were investigated along with seven stop - controlled intersections. Currently, fourteen of the fifteen signalized intersections are operating with an acceptable overall intersection LOS D or better in both the AM and PM peak hour. The following signalized intersections are currently operating with an overall intersection LOS E or LOS F in either the AM or PM peak hour. Intersection 3 — Route 522 (Millwood Pike) @ 1-81 Southbound Ramps — This intersection is currently operating at LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. The southbound approach (1-81 Southbound Ramp) is currently operating at LOS F in the AM peak hour and LOS E in the PM peak hour. This poor approach level of service contributes to the overall intersection LOS E in the AM peak hour. All other approaches at this intersection are operating at an acceptable LOS D or better in the AM and PM peak hours. 11 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 In addition to the signalized intersections, seven stop -controlled intersections were also analyzed. Stop -controlled intersection analysis results do not output overall intersection LOS. Instead, the worst operating minor approach level of service is reported. Two of the intersections have turn movements that are currently operating with an unacceptable LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour. 001 Intersection 17 — Route 522 (Winchester Road) @ Route 658 (Rockland Road) — The westbound left -right shared lane turn movements are currently operating at LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS F in the PM peak hour. Intersection 22 — Route 522 (Winchester Road) @ Route 637 (Riverton Road) — The westbound minor approach left -right shared lane turn movements are currently operating at LOS F in the PM peak hour. All approaches are operating at LOS C or better in the AM peak hour. 12 DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 Table 2.3: Existing Conditions Level of Service Summary EicMag Year 20DB Intersect on Lane Group AM Peak Haar PM Peak Hour Iftter ... tien# Operatlon Approaeh L=Left T=Thr. 95th k R=Right 95th%Qu_we klovement Approach Intersection Queue Movement Approach Intersection FM Roadway WS Roadway Length (RI LOS LOS LOS Length )R) LOS Los LOS L as D 41 D Eastbound T 528 F E 780 - E R 166 D 204 C L 55 D 100 E Westeau.d T 379 E E 559 E E 1 Signalized M11—it A- PleasantValley Rd R 395 E 388 E D D 328 F D Northbound TL3 123 B 356 C L 103 B 171 D South[ound T 249 C C 397 D D R 0 A D A L 131) B 54 P D Eastha'und T R 109 B 557 D 98 B 06 B A Westbound T -R 94 A A 34 A C 2 Signalized Millwood Pike Frontage Rd B L 28 D 46 D Northbound T -R D 176 E E Southhountl —L -T 28 D D 26 D D R 19 D 28 D N bor.nd A 15 A orN R 0 A A6 3 Slgrnalized Millwood Pike IA1 SB Ramps E G L 262 D. 442 F C VJasfb ound T 481 C 36D A Southbound R 34B F F 299 1 E E L 115 535 D Eastbound T 170 A B 330 B C R 0 A 0 A L 50. C 113 D Westbound 7 147 B B422 C C 1-81 NB RampalFront Royal R 0 A B 0 A C L 132 C .454 D 4 Bignal¢ed Millwood Pike Pike Northbound T 140 C C 300 C D R 10 37 B 1 25 D 193 E Southbound T 69 D B BS D D R 0 A 0 A Easthound L.- 11 D D E 43 D D Westbauad L � 84 D C D 142 51 D D D B C L 0 D 5 Signalized Costello Drive Route 522 fJonhhaund `LR 171 C C 288 D Southbourd L 18 B A 381 C B T -R 14 A 37 A Wootb—d L 107 D D 42' C C R 41 D 25 C N ahlh-nd R 1135 A A 117 A A 6 Signalaed Airport Read Route 522 A A Southbound T 65 A A 71 A A Eastbound L -R 17D D D 390 - E Northbound L 75 A A 19 A A Slgnalizetl Paperraill Rd Recte 522 B C 7 (Route 644) T 75 A 1D4 A Southbound T -R 124 B 8 196 B e Easthound ll 51 C C 38 C C 2 0 A A A L 1 A Northbound T 0 A A 8 Stop- Macedonia Church Rd Raate522 N!A N/A Soudlbound L T 0 0 A A A 0 0 A A A Controlled (Route fi42) L 26 B D J6 C C Easthound R 26 A 36 A 9 Stop- sker TaRd Route 522 N.,thb... d L T 9 0 A A A NIA 19 0 A A A N/A Controlled (Route 642) L 0 0 N/A Southbound T D A A A 0 A A R D A 0 A Eastbound R 12 E E 5 E ? E Northbound L T 12 70 E A A 2 114 E A A t0 Signalized Marantb Manor Dr Rom 522 A A L fiI E 6 E Southbound 7 78 A A 93 A A R 6 A 2 A L -T 215 D C 133 D D Eastbound R 48 C 50 C7 - Westbound L T -R 10b 93 D C D 171 328 C D D L 104 D 152 Lord Fairfax Fwy (Rte 277 e p 11 Signalized Rte 340) Route 522 273 52 C C C Northbound T 145 C C R 45 C 59 D L 102 D 150 C G Sautlthound T 141 C C 21 C R 14 C Table 2.3: Existing Conditions Level of Service Summary (cont.) Existing Year 2008 ntersecdor Lune Group AM Peak Houf PM Peak Hour Intersection 7k Operation Approach L=Left T = ThrU R=Righi 95th Queue Movement Approach Intersection 95th Movement Approach Jnte rsection EPN Roadway NIS Roadway Length (ft) LOS LOS LOS L�9th Vin) LOS LOS LOS Eastbound L R 21 e D D D 20 8 D 0 D NorthboundT L 6 47 D A A 7 68 D A A 12 Signalizetl Lake Frederick Route 522 A A L 0 N/A 0 NIA Southbound T 100 A A 132 A A R 8 A 11 A Weslhound R 0 A A 1 B A Nodhhound T R 0 0 A A A 0 0 A A A 13 Stop Controlled Rocky Glen Dr Route 522 NIA NIA Southbound T 0 A A 0 A A Eastbound L -T -R 4 C C 5 D D Westbound L -T -R 2 C C 1 13 B Northbound LR e A A 0 A A Stop- Ashby Station Rd (Route NIA NIA 14 Controlled 639r Route 522 L 0 A 0 A Southbound T 0 A A 0 A A R 0 A 0 A Westbound L R 46 23 C C C 75 31 c C D L 0 A 0 A 15 Signalized Fairground Rd (Route 66 1) Route 522 Northbound T 103 A A A 143 A A A R 17 A 16 A Southbound L T 62 48 D A A 49 74 D A A Westbound L R 83 12 C C O 110 21 C C C L 0 A 0 A i6 Signalized Toray Dr Route 522 Northbound T 162 B 6 B 196 B B B R 22 B 10 R Seuthbountl T 107 A A A A 162 Westbound L 92 D D 100 F F Northbound T R 0 0 A A A 0 0 A A A 17 Stop Rot Rd (Route 650) Route 522 NIA NIA Controlled Bouthbountl L T 4 0 A A A 5 0 A A A Eastbound L R 75 5 C C c 10 10 C C c 16 Stop- Radance Rd (Route 627) Route 522 NIA NIA L 0 A 0 B ConV011ed Northbound T 0 A A 0 A B Southbound T -R: 0 A A 0 A A L 18 D 70 D Easibou d T 35 D D 61 D D R 34 D 71 D L 74 D 139 D Westbound T 30 C C 91 D D 19 Signalized Country Club RCITownsend Dr (Route 655) Route 522 R 24 C C 49 D O L 65 D 172 D Northbound T 182 1 B B 163 B C R 21 8 32 B L 50 0 76 D 317 C C Southbound T 215 B C 50 B R 19 B Westbound L 28 C C 94 72 C C c R 68 CA 20 Signalized 1 I66 WB Route 522 A Northbound T 135 A A 193 1 A A Southbound T 110 A A 135 1 A A L 109 C 33 C 34 C D Eastbound LT 109 c C 183 D R 75 C 21 Signalized 1-66 ED Route 522 A A T 231 B B 365 B D 24 NIA Nodhhound R 30 NIA Southbound L 202 N/A B 148 157 NIA D B T 92 D Westbound L -R 12 C C 198 f F T 0 A A 0 0 A A A 22 Stop- Rluen- Road Route 522 NIA NIA Northbound R 0 A Conbolfed 6authticuna L 2B B 6 0 B A B T 0 A Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Studer From Millwood Avenue & 5 Pleasant Valley Road (Winchester) to Riverton Road (Vrront RoyaI) k } f N 40 4f� A v Y Y. SAM Peak How PM Peal: How ? J AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 114 � d7^ ttr jiir 1P t `s I i� 6' ■ . Route 522 Multi moria! Corridor Study From Millwood Avenue & 5 Pleasant VaIley Read (Winchester) to F{ verton Road (Front Roya i) tz 4" r 7 J � ti 4J V - a l'. Legend _ ,} v I� • . LOS D 1 I Route �e 2Multimodal Corr dor Study - From Millwood Avenur�& 5 Pleasant Valley Road (Winchester)to Riverton Road (Front lioyaI) IJ �� 7. AWA Idf �r / f , N h � � 17 # 71. p�p 1 9 n ! fff d 19!t f � AM Peak Flour PM P,.k H.ur 20 zo fit," d. V-0104 s For the signal warrant analysis, the volumes at each intersection were analyzed using the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Millennium Edition. Given the limited nature of this study and the limited amount of volume data collected, each intersection was analyzed only for its satisfaction of the Peak Hour signal warrant conditions (Signal Warrant 3). The Peak Hour signal warrant conditions apply to intersections where a large number of vehicles pass through the intersection in a relatively short time period. The peak hour volume signal warrant analysis showed only one intersection, Route 522 / Riverton Road, which met the AM or PM peak hour warrant. It is important to note when assessing traffic signal needs that VDOT does not install a traffic signal until it meets warrants for eight hours and is approved by the District Traffic Engineer. Therefore, this intersection of concern should be continuously monitored. In 2008, a VDOT traffic signal warrant study was conducted for the intersection of Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Route 756 (Macedonia Church Road). A twelve hour set of traffic data was used to determine whether the warrants provided by the MUTCD were satisfied. The study found that the intersection does warrant a traffic signal based on the procedures described in the MUTCD. This signal is expected to be funded by development proffers. 1n 17 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Roadway Level of Service was also analyzed using Highway Capacity Software (HCS+) for the Route 522 Corridor at various locations along the corridor. Roadway LOS is determined by the peak hour roadway volumes as well as roadway characteristics such as roadway type, lane width, free flow speed, truck percentage and other factors. Roadway LOS is similar to intersection LOS in that both use the letters "A" through "F" to designate the different service levels. Table 2.4 shows the existing conditions Roadway LOS for the analyzed segments of Route 522. Tnhin 9 A- 1=xi4ztinn Rr9arIwnw I Pvpl rnf Rprvir•p .1;oimmary The Roadway Level of Service results show that the entire corridor is currently operating at Level of Service D or better. The roadway segments along Route 522/50/17, near the 1-81 interchange in the City of Winchester and Frederick County, are operating at LOS C and LOS D, respectively. Volumes are moderate to high and are expected to increase in the future, creating a worse Level of Service. The rural areas of the corridor are currently operating between LOS A and LOS C. 20 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 2009 HCM 2009 ADT Roadway Locality Roadway Location # Lanes Methodology (Count) Level of Service Route 522 South of Pleasant 4 Urban Street 15,200 B (Millwood Ave) Valley Rd City of Route 522 Apple Blossom Dr to 2 Urban Street 8,100 B Winchester (Millwood Ave) Jubal Early Dr Route 522 Jubal Early Dr to 4 Urban Street 27,700 C (Millwood Ave) 1-81 SB Ramps Route 522 1-81 SB Ramps to 1-81 4 Urban Street 37,300 D (Millwood Ave) NB Ramps Frederick Route 522 North of Costello Dr 4 Rural Multilane 21,600 B Co (Front Royal Pike) Route 522 North of Double 4 Rural Multilane 13,800 A (Front Royal Pike) Tollgate Route 522 North of County Club 4 Rural Multilane 21,700 B (Winchester Rd) Rd Warren Co Route 522 South of 1-66 4 Rural Multilane 29,700 C (Winchester Rd) The Roadway Level of Service results show that the entire corridor is currently operating at Level of Service D or better. The roadway segments along Route 522/50/17, near the 1-81 interchange in the City of Winchester and Frederick County, are operating at LOS C and LOS D, respectively. Volumes are moderate to high and are expected to increase in the future, creating a worse Level of Service. The rural areas of the corridor are currently operating between LOS A and LOS C. 20 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Safety Crash data from 2006 through 2008 was obtained from the City of Winchester and VDOT for the portion of the Route 522 Corridor north of Double Tollgate Road. This safety analysis was conducted to complement the August 2008 VDOT Study, US 340/522 Geometrics and Safety Survey, and only contains data from the northern terminus of the previous study (Double Tollgate) through the northern terminus of the study area (City of Winchester). The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommends that improvements be evaluated for intersections with a crash rate of over 2 crashes per million entering vehicles (MEV). As shown in Table 2.5 most of the intersections along the northern portion of Route 522 have crash rates of less than 1.00 crashes per MEV. The intersection of Millwood Avenue and Pleasant Valley Road has a crash rate of 3.27 per million vehicles entering the intersection, which is over the ITE threshold. For the portion of Route 522 south of Double Tollgate Road, crash data from the US 340/522 Geometric and Safety Survey was used for the analysis. The data for this study was collected from 2003 to 2007. The intersections of Route 522 with Double Tollgate Road, Fairground Road, and Reliance Road average 2.4 to 4.2 crashes per year. Traffic volume data is not available for these intersections, however when compared to the average crash data from the northern portion of the Route 522 Corridor, it seems that these intersections will be below the threshold of 1.00 crashes per MEV. Crash data was also analyzed for roadway segments along Route 522. Only intersection data and not link data was available from Pleasant Valley Road to Front Royal Pike. The statewide crash rate for primary roadways is 161 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The crash rate in the Staunton Region is 111 crashes per 100 million VMT. As shown in Table 2.6, all of the roadway links along Route 522 have crash rates less than the statewide average; however the section of Route 522 from the 1-81 northbound ramps to Papermill Road (Route 644) has a crash rate of 126 per 100 million VMT which exceeds the Staunton Region crash rate. This may be due to the number of access points along this portion of the facility as well as the more developed residential and commercial land uses. The crash data showed that there were 162 crashes along the northern portion of the Route 522 Corridor during the three year period. Approximately 33 percent of these were "Angle" type crashes, 25 percent were "Rear End" type, and 16 percent were "Fixed Object Off -Road". "Angle" and "Rear End" type accidents are often associated with at shared left turn lane. 21 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Table 2.5: Route 522 Roadwav Searnent Crash Ratps Rummary From To Link Length --- ---- Avg # Crashes --- - - ---, ADT Crashes per 100M Vehicle Miles Traveled Pleasant Valley Rd Frontage Rd Millwood Ave No Roadway Segment Crash Data Available Frontage Rd 1-81 SB Ramps 1-81 SB Ramps 1-81 NB Ramps/Front Royal Pike North of Study Area 1-81 NB Ramps/Front Royal Pike 0.19 NA 37,000 NA 1-81 NB Ramps/Front Royal Pike Papermill Rd (644) 2.43 16 14,000 126 Papermill Rd (644) Clark/Frederick Co Line 4.69 13 14,500 54 Clark/Frederick Co Line Double Tollgate 0.3 0.8 13,000 56 Double Tollgate Warren/Clark Co Line 1.8 7.6 17,000 68 Warren/Clark Co Line Reliance Rd 4.5 14.2 17,000 51 Reliance Rd 1-66 1.5 10.2 22,000 85 1-66 Warren Co Line/Front Royal 0 No Roadway Segment Crash Data Available wu cc. C aSH Mecuius hum GUy ur vvincnester rouce Department, VDv i Table 2.6: Intersection Crash Rates Summary ource.- sC Intersection 2006 2007 2008 Average # Accidents per year Average Crashes per Million Entering Vehicles 1 Millwood Ave @ Pleasant Valley Rd 38 19 40 30.8 2.46 2 Millwood Ave @ Frontage Rd 13 14 10 11.0 0.71 3 Millwood Ave @ 1-81 SB Ramps 0 2 0 0.8 0.05 4 Millwood Pike @ 1-81 NB Ramps/Front Royal Pike 1 1 2 1.3 0.06 5 Costello Dr @ Rte 522 1 1 1 1.0 0.11 6 Airport Rd @ Rte 522 0 2 0 0.7 0.09 7 Papermill Rd (644) @ Rte 522 0 3 0 1.0 0.15 8 Macedonia Church Rd (642) @ Rte 522 3 4 2 3.0 0.63 9 Tasker Rd (642) @ Rte 522 0 3 1 1.0 0.22 10 Maranto Manor Dr @ Rte 522 NA NA NA NA NA rash Records from City of Winchester Police Department, VDOT 22 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Existing Multimodal Facilities This section discusses existing multimodal facilities in the Route 522 Corridor. Recommendations for multimodal improvements to facilitate alternatives to single - occupant vehicle movements will be based on existing and future need and presented in the Recommendations chapter of this report. Data has been collected for pedestrian and bicycle facilities, freight and goods movement in the corridor, transit operations, and potential intermodal facilities such as park and ride lots. In the corridor's existing condition, the dominant mode of transportation within the Route 522 Corridor is by private automobile. Alternative modes are accommodated more so to the north of the I- 81 interchanges, within the city limits of Winchester, where there are transit services and the provision of sidewalk networks that can meet demand for alternative modes. In general, alternative modes do not exist in the rest of the study corridor. The following sections discuss the existing conditions for the various modes. Pedestrian Facilities Sidewalks exist along Route 522 within the City of Winchester and along the Route 522 Corridor in Frederick County, to the area of Costello Drive. Pedestrian facilities along the corridor are generally sufficient within the City of Winchester and Frederick County as sidewalks and crosswalks are part of the Route 522 streetscape and provide connection between commercial and mixed use developments in the area. Existing sidewalks are shown in Figure 2-7. Pedestrian facilities become non-existent along the rest of the Route 522 Corridor, south of Costello Drive and the Costco / Delco Plaza shopping center. Pedestrian facilities are lacking in the more rural sections of the study area; particularly in Frederick, Clark and Warren Counties. Figure 2-7: Existing &dewalk Locations 23 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Bicycle Currently, there is a lack of bicycle facilities along US 522. With the exception of a single shared -use path along Macedonia Church Rd, south of Armel Elementary School, there are no other existing bike lanes or multi-purpose trails along or adjacent to the US 522 study corridor. As a result of minimal bicycle accommodations currently existing along most of the study corridor, only bicycle users who are comfortable riding with motor vehicle traffic would likely ride on the current state of Route 522. Transit The Route 522 Corridor is served by one fixed route line of Win -Tran that operates within the corporate limits of Winchester. Win -Tran Route 3, the Apple Blossom Mall route, is a fixed route service that operates between Winchester City Hall and the Apple Blossom Mall area. On weekdays, Route 3 departs City Hall every hour on the hour between 6AM and 7PM and on Saturdays between 9AM and 4PM. The Apple Blossom Mall route departs City Hall and then travels along Braddock St and Cork St before heading south along Parkway St. and Pleasant Valley Rd. to the Apple Blossom Mall area. On its inbound route, the Apple Blossom Route takes a more direct route to City Hall, as it follows Route 522 for the entire inbound route. According to ridership figures obtained from the Winchester Department of Transportation, the Apple Blossom Mall route served 18,283 riders between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2009. In addition to the fixed route public transportation service, the US 522 Corridor is also served by para -transit services. Para -transit is a curb -to -curb service available to citizens who are unable to utilize the regular fixed -route public transit system. Win -Tran operates para -transit services within the City of Winchester, while Virginia Regional Transit (VRT) operates a demand response service in Clark, Frederick and Warren Counties. Commuter bus service is available through Valley Connector for service into the Washington D.C. metro area. This service operates from various locations throughout the Winchester / Front Royal area to provide regional service, but does not serve the US 522 Corridor. Freight Patterns Freight is a vital contributor to the local economy as truck traffic accounts for up to 17 % of vehicles along the US 522 Corridor (VDOT Traffic Count Data). Furthermore, truck 24 DRAF'r - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 traffic from the Virginia Inland Port uses US 522 to access 1-81, 1-66 and 1-70 via US 340. Due to the important linkage US 522 has to the Interstate Highway System, incorporating freight accommodations is needed to allow the free flow movement of goods and services within and through the region. By addressing freight needs in this study, the US 522 Corridor will be better able to limit the negative impacts that freight and truck traffic often have on regional roadways. Virginia Inland Port: The Virginia Inland Port (VIP) is a major generator of truck traffic along the US 522 Corridor. The Virginia Inland Port is located on US 522 in Warren County, approximately one mile north of 1-66. The VIP is an inland intermodal container transfer facility for containers to transfer across modes for cargo shipped to and from the marine terminals in the Hampton Roads area. Along with the marine terminals in the Hampton Roads area, the Virginia Inland Port is one of four facilities that have been consolidated into the "Port of Virginia" by the Virginia Port Authority and processed 24,500 containers in 2009. The VIP is connected to rail owned and operated by Norfolk Southern and is part of the Crescent Corridor initiative. The Crescent Corridor is a key north -south rail corridor that provides intermodal freight service between the Southeast United States and New England. Norfolk Southern plans to improve efficiency along the Crescent Corridor by upgrading rail infrastructure in order to provide double -stacking services that will increase container capacity. Contacts with county officials, port representatives and trucking companies and a review of the available data have yielded the following conclusion: While located directly on Route 522, the VIP does not appear to be a significant contributor to the high truck volume percentage on Route 522, between Interstates 66 and 81. The average ntunber of containers processed daily (less than 100) at the VIP would equate to under one -percent of the average daily traffic along Route 522. The high percentage of truck traffic along Route 522 may be caused by cut -through traffic between Interstates 66 and 81, creating a more direct route and also bypassing a truck weigh station along I-81. It would be difficult to divert any of this traffic without impacting the local freight activity centers, including local retailers and distribution centers. These conclusions are supported by the following observations: o Since 2004, the VIP processes an average of 31,400 containers annually, which is unlikely to produce more than several hundred truck trips daily; © Trucks that service the Virginia Inland Port (VIP) use U.S. 340 and U.S. 522, which provide direct access to the VIP; The majority of the local commercial and logistics development, likely destinations for much outbound container traffic, has occurred along the U.S. 522 Corridor, and 25 DRAFT Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 * Heavy truck percentages range from seven to seventeen percent of the Average Annual Daily Traffic along Route522 in the City of Winchester, Frederick County, Clarke County, and Warren County. While the VIP container traffic adds to the number of heavy trucks on Route 522, the high percentage of heavy trucks along Route 522 may be caused by cut -through traffic between Interstates 66 and 81, and other freight activity centers along the corridor. There are several activity centers and freight markets that attract freight traffic along key Virginia corridors. Several of these markets are directly or indirectly connected to Route 522. This section details the freight markets surrounding Route 522, as reflected in Figure 2-8. Frederick County/Winchester - The City of Winchester is an independent city surrounded by Frederick County. Winchester is only 50 minutes west of Dulles International Airport. Using 1-66, one can reach Winchester from Tyson's Corner, Northern Virginia, in just over an hour. Both the City of Winchester and Frederick County promote economic development and encourage many retailers, manufacturers and technology enterprises to be located within their borders. The County has focused on two freight intensive industries in its economic development efforts: Food Processing - The food processing industry is a link between the agricultural and retail sectors and Winchester is the critical location for these companies to operate. Winchester is an attractive location for perishable products and packaged foods manufacturing operations. o Distribution - Located on the hiterstate 81 corridor and at a mid -point on the east coast, Fredrick County is well suited for high-end assembly operations. Ford Distribution Center, Horne Depot Distribution and Kohl's Distribution have taken advantage of the area's transportation system, workforce and tax advantages. Warren and Clarke Counties - Warren County is located in the Shenandoah Valley of northwestern Virginia and is approximately 70 miles from Washington, D.C., 110 miles from Baltimore and 135 miles from Richmond. The Virginia Inland Port is located in the county, with direct access to the Route 522 Corridor. Clarke County is a rural county with a population of approximately 14,500. Over 97 percent of the county is zoned as either agricultural/open space or forestry. The preservation of the rural landscape of the county has influenced many industries, business and residential developments to move farther west to Frederick County. 26 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Figure 2-8: Virginia Inland Port and Surrounding Region 522 r, nd Vlrginie IntePort `_ // 11 L �, J 300 522 27 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Regional Routes Used by VIP Traffic This assessment focuses on the impact of VIP truck traffic on Route 522. Discussions with both VIP representatives and local freight -related industries suggest that Route 522, while directly used by VIP freight, is not impacted significantly by VIP -generated traffic, simply because VIP does not generate a large volume of truck traffic. VIP daily truck traffic is not estimated to exceed several hundred truck trips per day. Therefore, much of the truck traffic that is on U.S. 522/340, adjacent to VIP, is a combination of local warehousing/distribution center traffic and other possible cut - through traffic. VIP traffic is oriented to Interstate 81, 1-66 and 1-70, using U.S. 522 and U.S. 340 to access the interstate system for regional destinations. In addition, U.S. 522 connects with U.S. 340 and provides a direct route to 1-70, which extends east and provides connectivity to Baltimore. Park and Ride Lots VDOT maintains park and ride facilities across the Commonwealth in efforts to reduce congestion through the encouragement of carpooling. The US 522 Corridor is served by the Crooked Run and the Double Tollgate Park & Ride lots. The Crooked Run lot is owned by Warren County and is located just south of US 66 in Front Royal at the intersection of US 522 and Riverton Road. The Crooked Run facility has 262 spaces available and is also served by the Valley Connection express bus service to Northern Virginia and Washington D.C. The Double Tollgate lot is a VDOT owned facility located at the US 522 intersection with Ray Hope Lane, just south of VA 277/340 and has 187 spaces available. GO DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Other Roadway IDeficiencies A field visit was conducted to assess the safety and access of the US 522 Corridor and to build upon the VDOT US 340/522 Geometrics and Safety Survey, dated August 2008. The focus of the field visit was the northern section of the corridor from Lord Fairfax Parkway (Route 277 / 340) in Clarke County, through the 1-81 interchange, to Pleasant Valley Road in the City of Winchester. The southern portion of the corridor, south of Lord Fairfax Parkway is discussed in the VDOT US 340/522 Geometrics and Safety Survey. The typical section for most of the northern Route 522 Corridor in Frederick County and the City of Winchester is up to VDOT standards. South of Papermill Road (Route 644), the typical section of US 522 is two twelve -foot lanes in each direction, the shoulders are a minimum of six feet, and there is a raised or depressed median at least twelve feet wide, except where left -turn lanes are present. North of Papermill Road, US 522 is five lanes, with the center lane being a shared left -turn lane. Curb and gutter are present on both sides of the roadway. The access point spacing throughout the corridor does not meet the standards set by VDOT's Access Management Design Standards for Entrances and Intersections: Principal Arterials. The VDOT access management regulations state that unsignalized crossovers on rural principal arterials should be spaced at distances of at least 1,760 feet for roadways with speed limits of 50 miles per hour or greater. Some of the commercial access points throughout the corridor also do not meet the VDOT regulation of 585 feet for a rural arterial or the 325 feet for an urban arterial. This is especially true for the northern portion of US 522 leading into the City of Winchester as many commercial access points are in close proximity to each other. Figure 2-9 and Figure 2-10 show examples of close proximity access points along the corridor. Other deficiencies in the northern portion of the US 522 are discussed in Appendix A Missing portions of sidewalk and below -standard pedestrian ramps (Also shown in Figure 2-10) Deteriorating pavement conditions and pavement markings. Inoperable pedestrian signals and pedestal poles missing signal heads. Trailblazing signs that are not standard sizes. Possible drainage issues and/or puddling. According to the US 340/522 Geometrics and Safety Survey, US 522 from Country Club Road in Warren County to the Double Tollgate area in Clarke County has a cross- section of two sub -standard ten -foot lanes in each direction. The US 522 Corridor in this area is primarily on rolling terrain, with certain sections having significant vertical curves LR DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 and poor sight distance. The southbound lanes in the area south of Lake Frederick contain vertical profiles that should be adjusted to match the northbound lanes. Horizontal curvature is light to moderate throughout the study area corridor. Figure 2-9: Example of Median Crossover Not Meeting V®OT Regulation Figure 2-10: Example of Commercial Access Not Meeting V®OT Regulation 30 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 3.0 PROJECTED FUTURE CONDITIONS Projections of future traffic along the Route 522 Corridor were developed for the Horizon Year 2035. Various methods and sources were used in generating future condition traffic volumes within our study area. These methods, described below, were utilized to determine future traffic levels in the study area for the Horizon Year 2035. The highway capacity analysis presented in this chapter is based on a future roadway condition where no new roadway improvements are in place other than those already planned and programmed in the regional plan. 2035 Future Land use Planned land use was obtained from the City of Winchester, Frederick County, Clarke County, and Warren County and compared to the respective existing zoning. The planned and expected land use along the corridor was analyzed to determine the expected corridor growth. The Route 522 Corridor in the City of Winchester is a short but heavily traveled portion of the study area. The Millwood Avenue and Jubal Early Drive area is composed of relatively mature and stable land uses, including institutional (Shenandoah University) and commercial (Apple Blossom Mall) areas. Local land use policies are focused on infill and redevelopment of adjacent commercial uses. A corridor overlay district is present on Millwood Avenue to the north of Pleasant Valley Road that controls property setbacks and controls design of adjacent uses. Currently, there is no such corridor overlay district on Route 522 to the south of Pleasant Valley Road. The City of Winchester future land use is shown for the study area in Figure 3-1. Figure 3-1: City of Winchester Future Land Use Source: City of Winchester Comprehensive Plan Map JI DRAFT- Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Similar to its existing zoning, Frederick County has a variety of planned future land uses, ranging from Urban Development Areas (UDA) to rural conservation areas. Frederick County implements a policy of channeling growth into UDAs and Sewer and Water Service Areas (SWSA) with a more urban character. The Route 522 study area is label as a UDA from the Interstate 81 interchange to south of Papermill Road. The UDA picks up again on the west side of the Route 522 Corridor, from West Parkins Mill Road to south of Armel Road. From there a SWSA on the west side of Route 522, extends south to Maranto Manor Drive. South of Maranto Manor Drive is expected to remain rural in character. The Frederick County future land use is shown for the study area in Figure 3-2. Legend Rural Community Center Residential Mixed Use Age Restricted Mixed -Use Business . Mixed Use Commercial N Office Highway Commercial Industrial Mixed Use Industrial 5 Office iK Urban Center . Neighborhood Village Planned Unit Development Recreation Natural Resources & Recreation Open Space Inshrut-al Historic V DSA Figure 3-2: Frederick County Future Land Use v i —1 ti's ' • Source_ Frederick County Comprehensive Plan Map Also in the Frederick County 2007 Comprehensive Plan, potential locations of Neighborhood Villages and Urban Centers are identified. Both the Neighborhood Villages and Urban Centers are intended to create mixed-use neighborhoods that incorporate residential, commercial, retail, educational and public uses into walkable neighborhoods with half mile walk sheds. As stated in the Frederick County Comprehensive Plan, Neighborhood Villages "are envisioned to be compact centers that focus and complement the surrounding neighborhoods, are walkable and designed at a human scale, and which are supported by existing and planned road networks." The Figure 3-3: Frederick County Development 32 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Urban Centers are intended to be more intensive than the neighborhood Villages containing higher densities and a larger commercial core designed around a public space which would serve as a focal point of the development. One Neighborhood Village and one Urban Center are planned within '/4 mile of Route 522. The potential Urban Center is located on the west side of Route 522, between Airport Road and Papermill Road. The potential Neighborhood Village is located on the east side of Route 522, south of Papermill Road. Both are shown in Figure 3-3. The Winchester Regional Airport is located in the vicinity of the study area, off of Airport Road, in Frederick County. Historically, there have been conflicts between residential communities and airports, citing fly -over Figure 3-4: Airport Support Area areas and noise sensitive areas surrounding airports. To address this, the Winchester �'�'•' Regional Airport Authority developed an Airport Support Area for the airport. The support area extends to the east of Route 522 from the intersection of Route 522 Route 50 to south of the intersection ofa.�d..n Route 522/Airport Road, shown in Figure 3-4. As stated in the Frederick County 2007 Comprehensive Plan, this area would prohibit further residential rezoning to protect the fly -over areas and noise sensitive areas and ensure continued airport use and future airport expansion. Business, low rise commercial development, and industrial land uses should be the primary uses in the airport support area. Figure 3-5: Future sand Use at Double Tollgate 34t 522 6 DOME TOUASM f � � Y A 35 �l Clarke County is a predominately rural county and the future land uses are designed to keep the majority of land in Clarke County as AOC (Agricultural, Open Space and Conservation). The Double Tollgate (Intersection of US 340 and US 522) is the sole area along the US 522 Corridor in Clarke County to be designated as something other than AOC. The Clarke County Comprehensive plan has a Business Intersection Area Plan for the Double Tollgate, which indicates that the area will consist of a zoned highway commercial area. This is consistent with the findings of the existing land use conditions. Clarke County is currently working on land use 33 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 guideline standards for the Double Tollgate area. In Warren County, parcels along the US 522 Corridor are designated to have future land uses virtually identical to those of the current zoning ordinance. The future designated land uses along the corridor consist of commercial parcels on the west side of US 522/ US 340 and industrial land uses along the east side of the roadway. Minor changes in the future designated land uses, call for three proposed commercial areas to infill parcels that are currently agricultural zoned properties that are located adjacently to already commercially zoned properties. Figure 3-6: Warren County Future Laud Use along US 522 34 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 9,035 Traffic Forecasts Methodology Forecast traffic volumes were generated for the Horizon Year 2035 using the following methodology. 1) Historic traffic counts (2005-2008) were obtained from VDOT's Traffic Count Database. At most roadway segments the 2008 traffic volume was less than the 2005 traffic volume, resulting in a negative growth rate. Therefore, the historic traffic growth rate was not used, as it would not accurately reflect the anticipated growth in the corridor. 2) Many developments are planned and expected within the next 25 years throughout the study area. Meetings were conducted with each locality's planning department to better understand the anticipated future land use and proposed developments in the Route 522 Corridor. These plans were compared to the existing VDOT Winchester Region Travel Demand Model's 2030 socioeconomic data. The travel demand model is a tool to calculate and forecast existing or future demand on a transportation network. The Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) in the model only extend to the MPO boundary, including the City of Winchester and Frederick County, while the model's roadway network extends to the Town of Front Royal. The MPO localities identified areas within the model network where the current future land use socioeconomic data (population and employment) from the VDOT Model did not accurately represent future development data. The model's socioeconomic data was updated based on these planned developments. Not being in the MPO area, Clarke County and Warren County planners identified planned and potential developments along the Route 522 Corridor to be accounted for in projecting future traffic volumes. 3) Taking into account the length of the corridor, and its large development potential, it was decided that a simple straight growth rate would not accurately reflect traffic conditions at the intersection level, which is a focus of this study. Future large-scale development projects would impact the intersection traffic volumes in specific locations more significantly than applying a straight growth rate along the entire corridor. Four large scale developments were identified along the corridor that would have significant impacts at various study area intersections. These developments are: a. Russell 150 (Frederick County - near Airport Road) — A mixed use development with a proposed 285 residential units, 440,000 square feet (sf.) of commercial retail, and 264,000 sf. of office space. b. Wal-Mart @ Eastgate (Frederick County — near Tasker Road) — Proposed plans call for 152,000 sf of retail. 35 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 c. Cedarville Center (Warren County — near Rockland Road) — A proposed 750,000 sf. commercial development d. Crooked Run II (Warren County — near Country Club Road) — A proposed 800,000 sf. Commercial development The traffic impact studies for these developments were utilized to help develop AM and PM peak hour site trips at each development. Trip distributions, trip assignments, driveway locations, and other data from the traffic studies were used in generating the trips at the intersections and along Route 522. 4) The VDOT Winchester Region Travel Demand Model was run with the updated socioeconomic data based on the input from the localities. The four large developments were not included in the model. The model roadway network remained the same except for a new roadway connection between East Tevis Road (Winchester) and Route 522 (Frederick). This connection is a planned project with VDOT's Revenue Sharing program, requiring a 50% local match, which will provide an additional connection from Winchester over Interstate 81 and into Frederick County. This connection is expected to divert a significant amount of vehicles away from the Interstate 81 interchange area of Route 522/50/17. The Tevis Street extension project is further discussed in Chapter 4 (Route 522 Corridor — Other Capacity Improvement Recommendations). The model output generated a growth rate for different sections of the corridor, which was then applied to the existing count data to develop 2035 background traffic volumes. The trips generated from the large developments were added to the background traffic volumes to determine the overall 2035 future traffic. Horizon Year 2035 A.M. and P.M. peak hour volumes were generated for the study area intersections. Daily roadway segment volumes were also developed for analysis. 5) The proposed Route 37 Bypass was not accounted for in the travel demand model network. This decision was made due to the uncertainty of the timeline of the construction of the Route 37 Bypass, given the status of the current funding sources. Should the Route 37 Bypass be constructed prior to the horizon year, 2035, it would be assumed that some of the traffic using Route 522 would be diverted to Route 37, reducing overall traffic along Route 522. By not modeling the Route 37 Bypass, a more conservative approach was taken developing future traffic volumes. The impact of the proposed Route 37 Bypass is discussed further in Chapter 4 (Route 522 Corridor — Other Capacity Improvement Recommendations). 36 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Forecast 2035 Future Traffic Volumes As described in the methodology section, the existing intersection and roadway traffic volumes were forecast to Horizon Year 2035. Future year intersection turn movements were developed for the AM and PM peak hours and Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes were developed for the roadway segments analyzed in the existing conditions. Resulting 2035 roadway traffic volumes along Route 522 are compared to existing volumes in Table 3.1. 'Anhln'I 'I• a-Wnri7nn Naar qni- Foof mp 12n,ndwav Trafffir Vniumaes 'ADT denotes Average Daily Tratflc Existing turn movement counts at key intersections throughout the Route 522 study area were also grown to Year 2035 based on model output and development trip generation. A number of planned changes to the intersections are expected by Year 2035, including the following. The Russell 150 development is planned to develop across from the existing Route 522 / Airport Road intersection (Intersection 6). The development would access Route 522 at this existing intersection. 37 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Projected Resulting 2009 ADT 2035 Average Locality Roadway Location (Count) Roadway Annual Growth Volume Rate (AAGR) Route 522 South of Pleasant 15,200 19,200 1.0% (Millwood Ave) Valley Rd City of Route 522 Apple Blossom Dr to 8,100 10,200 1.0% Winchester (Millwood Ave) Jubal Early Dr Route 522 Jubal Early Dr to 27,700 37,500 1.4% (Millwood Ave) 1-81 SB Ramps Route 522 1-81 SB Ramps to 1-81 37,300 54,200 1.7% (Millwood Ave) NB Ramps Route 522 Frederick (Front Royal North of Costello Dr 21,600 44,000 4.0% Co Pike Route 522 (Front Royal North of Double 13,800 26,400 3.5% Pike) Tollgate Route 522 North of County Club 21,700 40,400 3.3% (Winchester Rd) Rd Warren Co Route 52 South of 1-66 29,700 45,100 2.0% (Winchester Rd) 'ADT denotes Average Daily Tratflc Existing turn movement counts at key intersections throughout the Route 522 study area were also grown to Year 2035 based on model output and development trip generation. A number of planned changes to the intersections are expected by Year 2035, including the following. The Russell 150 development is planned to develop across from the existing Route 522 / Airport Road intersection (Intersection 6). The development would access Route 522 at this existing intersection. 37 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 * The intersection of Route 522 / Macedonia Church Road (Intersection 8) is expected to be signalized, as VDOT currently has requested for the signalization. The intersection of Route 522 / Toray Drive (Intersection 16) is planned to accommodate a secondary driveway to the Blue Ridge Shadows Community and is expected to be signalized. ® The intersections of Reliance Road and Rockland Road with Route 522 (Intersections 17 & 18) are expected to be combined into one intersection at Reliance Road. Existing Rockland Road is expected to dead end prior to intersecting with Route 522. The forecast 2035 AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are shown with the 2035 future analysis results in the next section. 2035 Traffic Deficiencies Capacity analyses were conducted for Horizon Year 2035 conditions at each of the key intersections along Route 522, using Synchro 7.0 software. Analysis was conducted with optimized traffic signal timings, as it was assumed that all signalized intersections would be optimized as needed. Seventeen signalized intersections were investigated along with four stop -controlled intersections. By Year 2035, eleven of the seventeen future signalized intersections are expected to operate with a poor LOS E or LOS F during either the AM or PM peak hours, including the following: Rte 522 (Millwood Ave) & S Pleasant Valley Rd Rte 522 (Millwood Ave) & Frontage Rd ® Rte 522 (Millwood Ave) & 1-81 SB ® Rte 522 (Millwood Pke) & 1-81 NB / Front Royal Pke s Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Costello Drive • Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Airport Rd ® Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Papermill Rd Rte 522 (Front Royal Pke) & Lord Fairfax Hwy (Rte 277 & Rte 340) 6 Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & Country Club Rd (Townsend Dr) Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & 1-66 EB Rte 522 (Winchester Rd) & 1-66 WB The remaining signalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better for both the AM and PM peak hour. 38 DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 By Year 2035, three of the four stop -controlled intersections have turn movements that are operating with an unacceptable LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour, including: Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) / Tasker Road ® Route 522/340 (Winchester Road) / Ashby Station Road ® Route 522/340 (Winchester Road) / Riverton Road Only the intersection of Route 522 (Winchester Road) / Rocky Glen Drive is expected to have all movements operating at LOS D or better in the AM and PM peak hours. Detailed LOS and 95th percentile queue length results from the Synchro software analysis are shown in Table 3.2. Existing traffic conditions, including existing turn movement counts, lane geometry, and movement LOS, are shown in Figure 3-7 through Figure 3-10. For the signal warrant analysis, the future volumes at each stop -controlled intersection were analyzed using the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Millennium Edition. Given the limited nature of this study and the limited amount of volume data collected, each intersection was analyzed only for its satisfaction of the Peak Hour signal warrant conditions (Signal Warrant 3). The Peak Hour signal warrant conditions apply to intersections where a large number of vehicles pass through the intersection in a relatively short time period. The intersection of Route 522 / Tasker Road is expected to meet AM and PM peak hour signal warrants by Horizon Year 2035. The planned Wal-Mart near this intersection would trigger the peak hour signal warrants when it is constructed. The Route 522 / Riverton Road intersection met the PM peak hour signal warrant in the existing conditions and is expected to meet the same warrant in the future. 39 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Table 3.2: Future Year 2035 Conditions - Level of Service Summary Future Yea12035 IntelSeclion# Gpalaip. nlplsedlien Approach Lane Group L = Len T = Td,. AM peak Xau1 PM Peak Hour R=Ri hl 95th %Queue Mp—Idl A pploach In1e16ec1ipn 95In Q9'h eh Movement Applpaph inletsec9pn Em, RD—y Nl9 Roadway Lenoth ly ) LOs Los LQ6 L ( ) LOS LOS LOS L AD B Eastbound T 498 E D F F R 91 B CLWoslbound T 283 c C P Millwod Ave Plea.ant Valley Rd R 311 e D D F Nodhbpund L T -R 120 153 C C F FL F 96 ❑ F5oNhbopnd T 215 F F #2DD F F R A51 T -R 8.41 EDE DFwmlb.dw L T•R 171 B2 8 A AB A 2 Signalized Millwood Pike Frontage Rd c E NpdhbouM T•R 102 E F FSdulhbaund E E E Eae[bpund R 100 A 6 3C77 A F 3 Signalizes Millwood Pike I B1 SB Ramps D F Westbound L T 535 1216 F E E R5 1055 FF F southbound R 626 F F 476 1 F F L 234 E 1 F Eaetbpund T 466 D C 610 D F R 0 A 6 A L B2 C 12i F Weslbpuntl T 417 C C 6t5 F F a 5igA41ixM M�Ilrmed Pika h01 Na RampA+Fmnl Royal Plke R D A G 0 A F L 33b D 805 F Npdhhpulld T 325 D 0 49B F F R 72 a 108 C L 209 E 242 F 8puhbound T 222 E C 130 F F R 6 A 0 A Eastbound LRT 15 D D 13 C C 'Nestho untl L T 102 29 C C c 124 71 L C c 5 Sidnaliud coctello D". Route 522 c No dhbohnd T -R 472 C C 718 F F 6eNM1bound L 144 216 B E T -R 232 A B L 92 Q 849 F Eaalbaund T 24 ❑ D 50 a F 3D 0 B5 F WMlbeuro71 72 D D D BB 60 C C G 6 splwltzed Airyp Road Route 522 43 a e 257 F F Nadhbpund82 G C 8B4 F F 40 A 68 C 92 D 126 D SONhbpund97 e B eel F F IRTR'. 53 A ]❑1 C Eastbpund06 E E 1395 F F 7 .i3 1izctl pappl dII, Rd Route 522 D Nodhbound93 F 40 B 690 FF B60 G Ii.— and98 - E 1780 FEatlbound13 8 B 116 C G Nodhb.ulW17 A A A32Maratlanu 5t2 Be Church Rd40 Rau;o 522 e0A 0 A d95 A A 259 A A R 23 A 28 A E. --d! L WA F F NIA NIA F F F R WA 6 9 -p- C-1111ed Taakel Rd (R.-642) R... 522 L 11A NIA 263 C F A A NIA Na 1—dd A T 0 A L 0 NIA 0 0 NIA A A 9eul1beund T D A A 0 A R 0 A L 25 D F Eaalbound D R 21 C L T 26 124 D10 A AA0 S19n—d Malanla Manor 01 R-522 WA W2'1 AA 314 a AA Table 3.2: Future Year 2035 Conditions - Level of Service Summary (cont.) Future Vear 2035 InlersecfionC ❑pera'IOY , rseclion APPreaeh Lane Graup L=Leh = Thru R=Right 95th.%queue Ldl,Ih(8J AM Peak Hour Movement ""dcM1 Ince rsectian LOS. Los LOB S51h% Dueue an d' (H) PM Trak 1Advement L05 Heur Approach LOS Intersection LOG E/W Roadway N/9 Rdatlway Eesthound L -T R 560 1<] F G = 513 210 F E F Wes[bouM L T -R 296 279 C G C 3]6 978 ❑ F F 11 8lgnol¢etl Lard Fairtax RW lRle 27]& R1e w Rpule 522 F F L KT F N❑rthbound T515 F F 413 F 51❑ E F R 5 ❑ 39 D 307 F 419 Southbound T 535 F F 9]9 F F R 26 c 51 D EaslbouM L R 19 ^.0 D D D 19 10 D D D 12 fiignalded Lake Fredarck Rause 522 NorthboundL T 6 1601 D A A A 6 D A AI A L 0 I NIA 403 0 N/A SONhbouM T 302 A A ¢3S A R A 4 A 13 3, Controlled R Rocky Glan Di Route 522 Westbound R1 2 1B B b.0 3 C N/q Na Mbbund T R 0 0 A A A 0 A A A 0 A q Southbound T 0 A A E¢etbuuntl L -T -R I 59 I F F t1BF F WestbouM L-T•R 6h F F NIA F F Ncrthbound L -T R D 0 A A p 16 sloy Canuolled Ashby 3hd—Rd (Route fi39) R.- 522 NIA N/A 2 A A L 2 e 0 2 A C Saldhbound T 0 A B 0 q C R 0 A D A Westbound L R 42 22 C C G 53 0 G L G NorfhbcundT C 465 A G R 0 425 C C 15 319na1'¢ed Fairground Rd (Route 56'.) Route 522 6 B R 2T A 9 A Southbound L T 163 D51 A A 246 C A B Eastbound L -T -R 160 D D 19¢ E E Weatbaurb R 20 0 F o1 0 F NaMbauntl L T R 114 6f4 i2 E E B D 225 715 M F D C D 16 Signatired Tcray Dr1 Blue Ridoe Shadow She ❑nveway RPWe522 D D 152 1 F 1 62 E SdulMound T958 C D 957 0 D R C B 20 g 210 ❑ D Eastbound T G D 115 D 0 R 61 C 0 p L 82 C 06 D 17I1B Blgnall2ed Rockla nd Rd (Rouse FE9J2 Reliance Rd Route 522 Westhound T R 77 ?pe C ❑ 0 115 p ❑ 6 0 1i� Norhhuund T R 725 j1 E B E 149 A e 12 A L p SE A 315 q A Southbound T 529 G C R E 9 A L 55 E 121 - EaslbouM T 56 D D 79 D F R 120 D 1668 F L 86 F 397 146 `A F 0 DDr(Raine F t9 8ignvYzetl Gounlry Club Rd ! Towmm�d 655) Route 522 Wmlb— T 53 o F D F � D 4p5 F F Nonh—hd i d46 C c R 32 B L 9d D =40'7 F SodhbOundT 783E D 20 sd-l¢ed 1-66 WE Route 522 6 F F 1i4 E NPltbbound 6oNhbountl T T 696 250 R A B A {722 1550 E F E F 5 5 F 13 E EeaNdund LT 5¢5 F F 73 E F R 9fE F 21 Synag7ed IEg ES Ra -522 F 787 F F T 1319 F NaAhbedntl R 105 C F 2167 F 9t C F 5mghh.W L T 682 332 F A D 1673 690 F R F Westbound L -R 143 F F N/A F F F Nodl'hc4ntl T 0 A 22 Slap- CardrPlled Rrvenon Road Route 522 .WA N. 0 A 0. A R L A A So Nhbound L 11 G C d2 0 A E - 0 A Horizon Year 2035 Roadway LOS was analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual methodologies for the Route 522 Corridor at various locations along the corridor. Table 3.3 shows the existing and future conditions Roadway LOS for the analyzed segments of Route 522. Tahip -1 -1• Fi f irP Rnarlwav I -vP1 nff Igprvic---P Sury mary The future conditions results show that the corridor is expected to operate at LOS B — LOS E. The Route 522/50/17 Corridor in proximity to Interstate 81 is expected to operate at a poor LOS E. Volumes are high and are expected to experience breakdown conditions in the future. Certain areas of the corridor are currently operating at LOS D and could potentially be a problem if not addressed. Queer Modes and Summary Vehicular traffic increases in areas as development occurs. Due to the developments expected along the Route 522 Corridor, passenger car and freight traffic are expected to increase at a moderate to high rate between now and the Horizon Year 2035. Without improving the study area roadway network, the intersections along Route 522 and the roadway itself are expected to experience capacity deficiencies as development occurs 46 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 2009 Projected 2035 HCM 2009 Roadway 2035 Roadway Locality Roadway Location # Lanes Methodology ADT Level of Roadway Level of (Count) Service Volume Service Route 522 (Millwood South of Pleasant 4 Urban Street 15,200 B 19,200 C Ave) Valley Rd City of Route 522 (Millwood Apple Blossom Dr to 2 Urban Street 8,100 B 10,200 C Winchester Jubal Early Dr Route 522 (Millwood Jubal Early Dr to 4 Urban Street 27,700 C 37,500 E Ave) 1-81 SB Ramps Route 522 (Millwood 1-81 SB Ramps to 1 - 4 Urban Street 37,300 D 54,200 E Ave) 81 NB Ramps Route 522 Frederick Co (Front Royal North of Costello Dr 4 Rural Multilane 21,600 B 44,000 D Pike) Route 522 (Front Royal North of Double 4 Rural Multilane 13,800 A 26,400 B Pike) Tollgate Route 522 (Winchester North of County Club 4 Rural Multilane 21,700 B 40,400 D Rd) Rd Warren Co Route 522 (Winchester South of 1-66 4 Rural Multilane 29,700 C 45,100 D Rd) The future conditions results show that the corridor is expected to operate at LOS B — LOS E. The Route 522/50/17 Corridor in proximity to Interstate 81 is expected to operate at a poor LOS E. Volumes are high and are expected to experience breakdown conditions in the future. Certain areas of the corridor are currently operating at LOS D and could potentially be a problem if not addressed. Queer Modes and Summary Vehicular traffic increases in areas as development occurs. Due to the developments expected along the Route 522 Corridor, passenger car and freight traffic are expected to increase at a moderate to high rate between now and the Horizon Year 2035. Without improving the study area roadway network, the intersections along Route 522 and the roadway itself are expected to experience capacity deficiencies as development occurs 46 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 throughout the corridor and surrounding areas. Capacity improvements, reductions in vehicle demand, access management and smart growth planning are all ways of protecting the character and flow of the corridor. Corridor improvements are discussed in the next chapter. As vehicle demand increases, so do the other modes. Bicycle and pedestrian travel is also expected to increase as more mixed-use development occurs. Improvements to the bicycle and pedestrian facilities and other multimodal facilities are expected to occur and are also discussed in the next chapter. Freight traffic is also expected to increase. However, as more passenger car trips are generated by developments, the percentage of freight traffic could be expected to decrease. Interviews with VIP officials and data received provided no additional insight to future freight projections. There are plans for an inland port in Martinsburg, West Virginia, roughly 40 miles north of VIP. An inland port at this location would have the potential to divert container traffic from VIP, although is expected to mainly relieve pressure from the Port of Baltimore, Maryland. The Martinsburg inland port is still in the planning phase. The City of Winchester is currently considering a City Code amendment that would severely limit or totally ban freight through -traffic on trailers over a certain length (e.g. greater than 20 feet) within the City limits. This amendment would potentially reduce heavy truck percentages along Millwood Avenue, Jubal Early Drive, and Apple Blossom Drive. 47 DRAFT- Route S22 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 4.0 R0Ur_[_"E 522 CORRIDOR RECOMMENDATIONS The expected growth in the Route 522 Corridor will bring additional traffic to the study area and have a negative impact on the operation of area roadways and intersections. As shown in the previous chapter, these deficiencies are moderate to severe, with more than half of the intersections expected to operate at poor levels of service (LOS E or LOS F) during one or both peak periods of the day. There are some simple geometric fixes for certain intersections, such as adding turn lanes, while others have no traditional geometric solution. Opportunities for reducing demand by diverting traffic off of Route 522 to help improve the corridor without increasing capacity are limited due to the limited north -south connectivity through the immediate area. Ultimate solutions to the Route 522 Corridor and the intersections will require right-of- way, potentially impacting existing development, and has the potential to be very expensive. The recommendations developed consist of all of the improvements that would be needed to improve the study area roadways and intersections to acceptable operating conditions. Many of these improvements will be difficult to implement and will require significant political will and a long time frame. These recommendations will provide the City of Winchester, Frederick County, Clarke County, Warren County, and VDOT with a tool to help advance projects in VDOT's Six -Year Improvement Program and to obtain the needed right-of-way and roadway improvements when properties along the corridor develop or redevelop. Route 522 Corridor - Roadway Capacity Recommendations Mainline recommendations cover roadway improvements of Route 522 from S Pleasant Valley Road, in the City of Winchester, to Riverton Road, south of Interstate 66 in Warren County. Traffic volumes along most segments of Route 522 are currently, and are expected to remain, under capacity through Year 2035. Areas with expected poor roadway operations include the segment of Route 522/50/17 from Apple Blossom Drive to Front Royal Pike. Vehicles from Winchester and Frederick County use this segment of roadway to access the Interstate 81 interchange. The expected high traffic volumes and the number of traffic signals will require additional capacity along this segment. A widening from a four -lane to six -lane roadway should be considered from Apple Blossom Drive through Front Royal Pike. In addition to this recommended widening other roadway improvement recommendations should be considered. The Route 522 Corridor should adhere to VDOT design standards including, proper lane widths, shoulder widths, and lane striping/markings. Proper informational and directional signage should be provided where deemed needed. 48 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 The roadway segment near the Interstate 66 interchange is also expected to experience high traffic volumes as a result of planned developments in this area. Warren County has anticipated these high volumes and, as part of the 2008 Route 340/522 Corridor Transportation Plan, has recommended that the roadway be ultimately widened from a four -lane roadway to six lanes from Fairground Road (Route 661) to the Interstate 66 interchange ramps. The plan identifies the segment from Reliance Road (Route 627) to Interstate 66 be widened as Phase I, and the segment from Fairground Road to Reliance Road as Phase II. Based on future traffic numbers generated for this study, it is not expected that the roadway will experience a poor level of service in Year 2035. Future conditions intersection analysis revealed the need of additional through lanes in this section of Warren County. The Route 3401522 Corridor Transportation Plan does include this widening and should be considered, as aggressive land use and development occur. The rural sections of the study area are not expected to require additional roadway capacity along Route 522. Route 522 Corridor - Intersection Recommendations In addition to roadway capacity improvements to sections of the Route 522 Corridor, improvements are necessary to improve the analyzed intersections to acceptable operating conditions (LOS D or better). These intersection improvements include providing new or additional turn lanes and improvements to or new traffic signals (including traffic signal optimization). The majority of the intersections are able to achieve LOS D or better through traditional intersection improvements. The intersection improvement recommendations are discussed and graphically shown below. 49 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 2: US 522 and Frontage Road It is recommended that an exclusive northbound right -turn lane be constructed at the intersection of US 522 and Frontage Road. This will reduce the signal time needed for this phase while increasing the green time for other phases. The most easterly access point of the Best Western on Millwood Avenue is recommended for closure due to the close proximity to the intersection of US 522 and Frontage Road. This site has two other access points (Millwood Avenue and Frontage Road) that would remain. Intersection 1: US 522 (1V1411wood Avenue) and Pleasant Valley Road It is recommended that additional through lanes be added to the Millwood Avenue approaches at this intersection. Millwood Avenue to the north and south of Pleasant Valley Road would need an extra receiving lane to accommodate this improvement. It is also recommended that an exclusive northbound right turn lane be added to the S Pleasant Valley Road intersection. 50 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 4: US 522 (Millwood Avenue) and Interstate 81 Northbound Ramp The intersection of US 522 and the Interstate 81 northbound ramps is expected to operate over capacity in the year 2035. This intersection LOS could potentially be improved by future regional improvements that help reduce demand and increase capacity. Intersection 3: US 522 (Millwood Avenue) and Interstate 81 Southbound Ramps For the intersection of US 522 and the Interstate 81 southbound ramps, it is recommended that a westbound left -turn lane be constructed on US 522 and a through lane added in both the eastbound and westbound directions. These recommendations will coincide with the removal of the Interstate 81 southbound loop on- ramp. 51 DRAFT - Route S22 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 -- -- - I Intersection 5: US 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Ole , Costello Drive It is recommended that an kin f F Intersection 6: US 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Airport Road The intersection of US 522 and Airport Road is the location of the new access road to the Russell 150 Development. The recommended lane configuration for the new eastbound leg contains dual left -turn lands, a through lane, and a right - turn lane. It is also recommended that a northbound left -turn lane and a southbound right - turn lane be installed to accommodate new development traffic volumes. additional southbound left -turn lane be constructed at the intersection of US 522 and Costello Drive. This will reduce the green time needed for this movement and distribute the time to other movements. It is also recommended that the signal timing be optimized to include a westbound right -turn overlap. 52 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 8: US 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Route Macedonia Church Road In a separate study, VDOT has recommended the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of US 522 and Macedonia Church Road. For the signal to operate at an acceptable LOS, it is recommended that an exclusive eastbound right -turn lane be installed as well. 53 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 7: US 522 (Front Royal 7 -, Pike) and Route - 644 (Papermill � Road) t For the intersection of US 522 and I 00'`' Papermill Road, it is recommended that the intersection be widened to include 3 an additional t`! northbound left -turn lane, an eastbound right -turn lane, and a southbound right - um lane. The s additional turning lanes should improve delay at this location. Intersection 8: US 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Route Macedonia Church Road In a separate study, VDOT has recommended the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of US 522 and Macedonia Church Road. For the signal to operate at an acceptable LOS, it is recommended that an exclusive eastbound right -turn lane be installed as well. 53 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 N P.O. t:nw Intersection 10: US 522 (Front Royal Pike) and Maranto Manor Drive For the intersection of US 522 and Maranto Manor Drive, it is recommended that an additional eastbound left -turn lane be constructed to accommodate the expected traffic generated from the planned Wal-Mart in the area. This will reduce vehicle queues and wait time for the eastbound approach. ----i Intersection 9: US 522 (Front Royal Pike) and 'Tasker Road In the year 2035, due to the planned Wal-Mart development in the vicinity, a traffic signal is warranted for the intersection of US 522 with Tasker Road. No other improvements are recommended at this intersection. .t 1, 54 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 11: US 522 (Stonewall Jackson Highway) and US 340NA 277 (Lord Fairfax Parkway) The intersection of US 522 and Lord Fairfax Parkway (US340/VA 277) is expected be over capacity in the year 2035. It is recommended that an additional through -lane be added in the eastbound and westbound directions as well as an eastbound left -turn lane and a westbound right -turn lane. This will reduce the green time needed for these approaches and improve the overall LOS for the intersection. Intersection 12: US 522/340 (Stonewall Jackson Highway) and Lake Frederick Drive This intersection is expected to operate at an acceptable LOS A in the AM and PM peak hours. No improvements are expected to be needed. Intersection 0: US 522/340 (Winchester Rd) and Rocky Glen Drive Due to the low expected traffic at this intersection, no improvements are recommended at this stop -controlled intersection. ;intersection 14: US 522/340 (Winchester Rd) and Ashby Station Road Due to the low expected traffic at this intersection, no improvements are recommended at this stop -controlled intersection. Intersection 15: US 522/340 (Stonewall Jackson Highway) and Lake Frederick Drive This intersection is expected to operate at an acceptable LOS B in the AM and PM peak hours. No improvements are expected to be needed. 55 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 16: US 522 (Winchester Road) and Toray Drive/i31ne Ridge Shadow Site Driveway The intersection of US 522 and Toray Drive will be the location of the new Blue Ridge Shadows development site access. It is recommended that the intersection be signalized and northbound and southbound right -turn lanes be added. A new left -through - right shared lane is recommended for the new eastbound access point. The westbound approach should also be reconfigured to include an exclusive left -turn lane and a shared through - right lane. ►1 No . 00 4 W1 . Intersections 17 and 18: US 522 (Winchester Road) and Rockland Road / Reliance Road For the intersection of US 522 and Reliance Road, it is recommended that Rockland Road be re -aligned to intersect with the existing Reliance Road and the intersection be signalized. The recommended lane configuration at the new intersection includes dual left -turns for the southbound approach, exclusive right - turns for the northbound and southbound approach, and exclusive left and right -turn lanes for the eastbound approach. The relocated Rockland Road approach should have dual left -turn lanes, a through lane, and a right -turn lane. 56 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 k t N ! 4 W1 . Intersections 17 and 18: US 522 (Winchester Road) and Rockland Road / Reliance Road For the intersection of US 522 and Reliance Road, it is recommended that Rockland Road be re -aligned to intersect with the existing Reliance Road and the intersection be signalized. The recommended lane configuration at the new intersection includes dual left -turns for the southbound approach, exclusive right - turns for the northbound and southbound approach, and exclusive left and right -turn lanes for the eastbound approach. The relocated Rockland Road approach should have dual left -turn lanes, a through lane, and a right -turn lane. 56 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Intersection 19: US 522 (Winchester Load) and Country Club Road The intersection of US 522 and Country Club Road is expected to operate with a poor LOS in the year 2035. Recommendations for this location include constructing an additional eastbound right -turn lane and providing an additional southbound through -lane. The intersection will remain over capacity, but these improvements will reduce delay. '4 1 Intersection 20: ITS 522 (Winchester Road) and the Interstate 66 Westbound Ramps It is recommended that an additional northbound and southbound through -lane be added at the intersection of US 522 and the Interstate 66 westbound ramps. Although this will reduce delay, the intersection is expected to operate over capacity in the year 2035. This intersection LOS can be improved by future regional improvements. 57 DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 Intersection 22: US 522 (Winchester Road) and Riverton Road Intersection 21: US S22 (Winchester Road) and the Interstate 66 Eastbound Ramps At the intersection of US 522 and the eastbound Interstate 66 ramps, it is recommended. that an additional northbound and southbound through -lane be added, and an additional southbound left -turn lane. An additional receiving lane on the eastbound on ramp will be needed. Although this will reduce delay, the intersection is expected to operate over capacity in the year 2035. This intersection LOS can be improved by future regional improvements. Warren County is proposing a' signal at the existing intersection /f at McDonald's / Exxon Mobil < Gas Station (Handy Mart) south of Interstate 66. This project is ' part of a current request for revenue sharing funds. The Riverton Road intersection, N 001 located 700 feet south of this proposed signal would be _ impacted. If a traffic signal is P installed at this commercial entrance, it is recommended that Riverton Road not be signalized. While the minor movement of Riverton Road is expected to operate poorly in the future, the proposed traffic signal could generate sufficient gaps for the Riverton. Road minor movement to get through the intersection without significant delay. An exclusive right -turn lane is recommended to be added to the westbound approach of Riverton Road. 58 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Route 522 Corridor — Other Capacity Improvement Recommendations The majority of the intersection lane configurations and signal timings can be improved to reach LOS D or better in 2035. However, many of these recommendations are major improvements to intersections, possibly requiring large quantities of right-of-way, relocating businesses, extensive earthwork, and other constraints. Few of the intersections are still expected to remain over capacity with traditional intersection improvements. This section will discuss planned regional improvements that would increase capacity, potentially reduce demand, and ultimately create better traffic flow along the problem sections of the corridor. Route 52.2 Improvements West of Interstate 81 Interchange One of the City of Winchester's Transportation Planning Area Objectives in the Comprehensive Plan Update to "Improve east -west traffic flow in terms of convenience and safety along E. Jubal Early Dr in the area between 1-81 and Apple Blossom Dr." In order to achieve this objective there are a few different plans and existing studies to focus on recommendations in this section of the study area. In the City of Winchester, an upcoming Win -Fred MPO study will be investigating the possibility of closing Millwood Avenue to vehicular traffic between Jubal Early Drive and Apple Blossom Drive. This project would eliminate the one-way access point off of Route 522 and divert that traffic to the intersection of Jubal Early Drive / Apple Blossom Drive. While the closure would not increase capacity or reduce demand, it would be step in the right direction to consolidate close -proximity access points near the Interstate 81 interchange area. The City of Winchester has had discussions about the possibility to create grade separated intersections in the vicinity of Jubal Early Drive, Apple Blossom Drive, Millwood Ave, and Frontage Road (west of the 1-81 interchange). The potential grade separation is a Vision Plan project in the Win -Fred MPO 2030 Transportation Plan that would better handle the increasing east -west traffic volumes. Advantages for this plan include providing increased east -west traffic flow and increased safety (both vehicular and pedestrian) by designing grade -separated intersections with US 522/17/50. A conceptual sketch of a type of grade separation is shown in Figure 4-1. The results of the Millwood Avenue study may not be compatible with the plans for grade separation in this area. It is suggested that any approved recommendations presented from the Millwood Avenue study be carried forward. Any plans for grade -separation may be applirahle at a future time when future conditions dictate. 59 DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 Figure 4-1: Conceptual Sketch of Grade Separation '0 titin 4 so r �Re 30\ `�`'E� s \ Is yIlk sl / i4N+sa ��i Route 522/50 intersection relocation (BIRO at existing intersection) Figure 4-2: MPO Vision Plan Projects Another project in the Win -Fred MPO 2030 ' ---- Transportation Plan is the relocation of the Route 522 / Route 50/17 intersection to the east of the Interstate 81 interchange. Route 522 (Front Royal Pike) would be realigned, beginning north of Airport Road, and would intersection with Route 50 (Millwood Pike) east of 1-81. While the MPO plan was not specific about the exact location of the relocation, the ' intersection should be offset from the Interstate 81 ramps by % mile (in the vicinity of Prince Frederick Drive). The existing section of Route 522, north of Airport Road would remain open to local residential and commercial traffic. A right -in / right -out access point would still be provided for the existing Route 522 at its current intersection with the 1-81 ramps. r 60 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 By providing this relocation, it is expected that the demand at the existing intersection of Millwood Pike / Front Royal Pike / 1-81 NB ramps would be reduced, as vehicles accessing southbound US 522 from the east would not be entering the 1-81 interchange area. The project is shown as Vision Plan Project #37 in the Win -Fred MPO 2030 Transportation Plan, and is shown in Figure 4-2. East Tevis Street / Route 522 Connection over Interstate 81 As discussed in the 2035 Traffic Forecasts Methodology section of Chapter 3, a VDOT Revenue Sharing project is planned between the City of Winchester and Frederick County to provide a connection between existing East Tevis Street in the City of Winchester and US 522 in the vicinity north of Airport Road. This project is also expected to intersect with future Warrior Drive in the proposed Russell 150 development. Since this is a project expected to be constructed, it was modeled in the Travel Demand Model and included in the development of the future year traffic volumes and capacity analysis presented in Chapter 3. This connection across 1-81 is expected to divert significant traffic volume away from Route 522/50/17 and the Interstate 81 interchange area. US 522 north of Airport Road is expected to experience a reduction of 3,000 — 5,000 vehicles per day. Papermill Road, also crossing over 1-81, is expected to experience a reduction of up to 5,000 vehicles per day due to this new connection. It is recommended and expected that the East Tevis Street extension will be constructed and contribute to reducing demand of US 522 and other roadways in the area. Warren County Route 340/522 Corridor Transportation Plan The 2008 Route 340/522 Corridor Transportation Plan was created for Warren County and provides a framework for improvements to the corridor. Ultimately, the plan calls for Route 522/340 to be widened to six -lane roadway from Fairground Road (Route 661) to Interstate 66. The plan also recommends a reverse frontage / parallel roadway system along segments of the corridor, south of Fairground Road. This system of parallel roadways has the potential to reduce demand from Route 522/340 by connecting developments with roadways set back from Route 522/340. Access management is considered by recommending closures to certain median cross-over points, which would help the performance and flow of the corridor. Proposed traffic signals should be properly spaced according to VDOT standards. Proposed Route 37 Bypass Impact Also discussed in the 2035 Traffic Forecasts Methodology section of Chapter 3 is the uncertainty of the proposed Route 37 Bypass. The Route 37 Bypass would intersect US 61 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 522 with a diamond interchange approximately 1 mile south of the intersection with Papermill Road. Due to the uncertainty of the timeline of implementation of the Route 37 Bypass, the project was not accounted for in the travel demand model network. Should the Route 37 Bypass be constructed prior to the horizon year, 2035, it would be assumed that some of the traffic using US 522 would be diverted to Route 37, reducing overall traffic demand along Route 522, especially at the Interstate 81 interchange area. Localized development in the vicinity of the proposed interchange could increase traffic demand on sections of US 522 near the proposed Route 37 Bypass. The construction of the Route 37 Bypass would likely impact local land use policies and development. The developed land use design principles, outlined later in this chapter, could be updated according to the location of the new interchange and the expected development types located adjacent to the proposed Route 37 Bypass. It should be noted that developed land use design principle be flexible to accommodate any roadway improvements that are planned and those not yet envisioned. Conclusion In addition to necessary intersection and roadway improvements, these regional projects are designed to increase capacity and reduce demand along the expected problem areas of the Route 522 Corridor. As development occurs and funding becomes available, implementation of these projects and others should follow the locality's land use principles standards. The next section provides an overview of potential land use guidelines along the Route 522 Corridor study area. 62 DRAFT -Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study -September 2010 Land Use Design Principles/ Context Zone Sumwary The multi -modal design principles will enable localities to preserve roadway capacity along the corridor by managing the quality of future growth, so that development supports and expands transportation choices. The design principles provide localities with a series of multi -modal design standards to be considered in guiding public and private improvements along the US 522 Corridor. A full copy of the principles can be found in the complementary report. Design Standards The section on Design Standards identifies various design elements based within four specific zones of the overall corridor: Right of Way: The public owned land between the curbs that includes travel lanes for automobiles, transit vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. Recommendations regarding street and lane width, on -street parking, bicycle facilities, medians, curb radii, street crossings and pedestrian facilities are all included in the right of way section of the design principles. 91. Edge: The space generally between the public right of way and the edge of adjacent buildings and includes a variety of public and private elements that contribute to the pedestrian experience and reinforce the adjacent land use setting. Setbacks, streetscape, on-site parking, bicycle parking, walkways, sidewalk connections and transit stops and amenities considered in the edge zone. 191. Adjacent Land Use: Incorporates building adjacent to the roadway, and extends to surrounding land uses that are generally accessible and functionally related to the corridor. The adjacent land use recommendations include those for building site design, mixed-use development, natural features, compact development, building orientation, transparency, block size and massing fagade and design. W. Road System: The road system refers to the entire functional system of transportation that is directly related to the corridor, including parallel roads and connectivity to the secondary road network. Recommendations within the road system include those for access management, connectivity, and traffic distribution. 63 DRAFT- Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Corridor 'Types The corridor types illustrate idealized cross-sections that support the future land use vision for the US 522 Corridor, and are intended to be implemented over time, as development occurs and if the corridor is reconstructed or expanded. The corridor types describe both the context and function of the US 522 Corridor in the future, ranging from a more urban setting on the northern end of the corridor within the Winchester city limits and portions of Frederick County, and passing through both suburban and rural areas in Frederick, Clarke and Warren Counties. The map in Figure 4-3, below, shows recommended locations for the corridor types and cross sections identified on the following pages. ire 4-3: Context Lone Map Cor..._,r T ,,2,id Mixed Use Low -,Moderate Speed M.ixed Use High Speed Rural High Speed 64 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Mixed Use Low -to -l4ioderate Speed Corridor The study area within the City of Winchester, the commercial area and developing areas of Frederick County (north of Airport Road), and the Double Tollgate area of Clarke County have been designated as a Mixed Use Low -to -Moderate Speed Type. This corridor type is intended to support future multimodal transportation and development around commercial areas, either existing or planned. These areas are expected to develop with commercial and institutional uses and generate significant amounts of pedestrian activity in the next 25 years. The mixed use low -to -moderate speed corridor has very narrow setbacks, wide sidewalks and landscape buffers to create a more pedestrian friendly environment. Bike lanes, landscaped medians, bus stops, and wide sidewalks would be included to facilitate multimodal travel to local businesses. A typical cross section is shown below in Figure 4-4. Figure 4-4: Mixed Use Low -to -Moderate Speed Corridor Cross Section 'i ��' JI'�i_---� r:. SSI I _ --' ��,..�-.. _A :'i__ � - f 1 1 •.. '�- l_�� Iii � �' �� I� � ,-, , Mixed Use Nigh Speed Corridor The Mixed Use High Speed Type is located in southern Frederick County from the Airport Road area to the Double Tollgate area and also in the northern portion of Warren County. The mixed use high speed corridor occurs in less densely developed (commercial / industrial) or suburban areas and is characterized by a shared multi -use path and a shoulder & drainage swale. The typical cross section, as shown in Figure 4-5, shows narrow setbacks and formal landscaping to reinforce the high speed character of the roadway supporting both local and regional access. 65 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 N'iigure 4-5: Mixed Use High Speed Corridor Cross Section N, - ai - Rural Use High Speed Corridor The Rural High Speed Type is designed to support multimodal transportation in designated rural areas. The corridor type is located in the southern portion of Frederick County, as well as the area south of Double Tollgate in Clarke and Warren Counties. The rural use high speed corridor is characterized by wide setbacks with private landscaping or natural vegetation that support the rural and natural conditions that currently exist. Commercial uses developed in character with the rural area are also permitted, but not shown in the cross section in Figure 4-6. The multi -modal features and landscaped buffers are optional. u1igure 4-0: xura, use Uigh speed Corridor Cross Section 3 - c' f 1 n :n � _`��Y . R i,[p^�.-✓a�.w�^",' �F7 t�� y a �� .L'� •t` _ ._ . �, :,1�``^.y.J�', �-"C F.flw�y,.��.� �c�' '!IY 1 ,�4_ � ��`;i9^� fi�•:� �"��-��i�' � - ,r t�,:g 66 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Route 522 — Model Corridor Overlay Ordinance The Route 522 Corridor Overlay District is a "framework" for a multi -jurisdictional effort to protect the scenic nature of the Route 522 corridor between the City of Winchester and the Town of Front Royal. General in nature, the conceptual draft ordinance text is meant to provide guidance for the four jurisdictions located within the corridor: the City of Winchester and the counties of Frederick, Clarke and Warren. The Corridor Overlay District Conceptual Text provides an opportunity to apply various standards within the corridor types identified and described within the accompanying Multimodal Design Principles. Narrative in format, the Conceptual Text includes administrative provisions such as a statement of intent, establishment of Corridor Types, applicability, and non -conformities. It addresses land use provisions, including conditional or special uses, and reliance on underlying zoning district regulations, as well as a preferred mix of uses. Finally, the Conceptual Text addresses development standards by which recommended Design Principles can be regulated, including building height, massing and siting; building materials, colors and styles; parking requirements; signs and billboards; outdoor lighting; landscaping, screening and grading; and tree and woodland conservation. In most cases, appropriate language is recommended based upon ordinances of a similar vein found in Virginia and elsewhere; however, there are some cases where reliance upon existing zoning ordinances or additional study is recommended. A full copy of the route 522 Overlay District can be found in the complementary report. 67 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Other Growth Management Techniques Trigger Mechanisms In addition to the Design Principles, another growth management technique to be considered for the US 522 Corridor is triggering mechanisms. Triggering mechanisms involve completing reports to monitor the conditions along a corridor and address deficiencies based on the conditions found in the monitoring report. While triggering mechanisms are typically utilized along more urbanized corridors, this technique can be tweaked to fit the needs of the US 522 corridor by decreasing the frequency of monitoring reports. Triggering mechanisms are based on the monitoring reports which track the conditions along a corridor. The monitoring report should track land use and traffic conditions along the corridor, including rezoning, new developments, traffic volumes, level of service and accident rates. Major land development activity would trigger a review of the transportation needs including level of service implications, safety concerns, and any potential multimodal opportunities including transit service, pedestrian, and bicycle needs. Should the level of service deteriorate to LOS D or below, a review of potential improvements would be triggered to identify projects that would reduce demand through TDM measures or increase roadway capacity through lane additions or turning lanes. Once a consensus has been reached as to what improvements would effectively address deficiencies along the corridor, those projects should be moved up in the Transportation Improvement Program via amendments to the TIP. Conversely, if the monitoring reports indicate that there are no deficiencies and need for improvements, projects could also be moved down or removed from the TIP. One of the better examples of triggering mechanisms for a corridor study is in the Route 40 Corridor Improvements Study in Wilmington, Delaware. The Route 40 study is an ongoing effort that annually reviews existing conditions, the status of transportation and development projects along the corridor as well as developments in nearby areas that are likely to impact the study corridor. This study is led by a steering committee consisting of representatives from the MPO, state DOT and local jurisdiction. The improvements along the corridor are based on the annual Corridor Monitoring and Triggering Reports that outline conditions along the corridor and form recommendations for improving deficiencies in various sections of the corridor. Access Management In addition to intersection and other roadway improvements, the localities must focus on the management of access to developed land to ensure efficient traffic flow and 68 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 minimize hazards as development occurs in the study area. In July 2008, VDOT adopted access management standards that roadways need to adhere in the design of intersections, turn lanes, entrances and spacing of entrances, intersections, crossover medians and traffic signals. The goals of VDOT's Access Management Design Standards for Entrances and Intersections: Principal Arterials are to: Reduce traffic congestion, ® Enhance public safety by decreasing traffic crash rates, .- Support economic development by promoting the efficient movement of people and goods, ® Reduce the need for new highways and road widening by maximizing the performance of the existing state highways, and Preserve the public investment in new highways. As development increases in the study area, the localities should look for opportunities to regulate interparcel connections, site access restrictions, traffic signal and access point spacing and other measures to help maintain traffic flow along the Route 522 Corridor. In the areas expecting future developments it is recommended that the locality monitor potential development and rezoning, while preserving proper intersection spacing. In all, these regulations seek to balance the land development right of property owners against the need to maintain acceptable traffic conditions along Route 522. Ensuring these regulations are strictly adhered to will help maintain acceptable levels of traffic congestion on Route 522 longer than if these regulations did not exist, thus extending its capacity and limiting delay. 69 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Route 5-00- Corridor - Multimodal Recommendations A variety of multimodal improvements were developed for the US 522 Corridor and are presented in this section. These multimodal improvements will not only enhance the movement of people and goods in the corridor by meeting potential future demand, but they also provide alternative modes of transportation in the corridor, which is especially critical to growing areas such as this study area. As discussed in the land use section of this report, the corridor is anticipated to continue to develop, especially in the northern portion of the study area. It is critical to ensure that all modes of transportation are integrated into the corridor. As development projects are proposed and reviewed in the future, multimodal improvements should be part of the comprehensive approach to meeting future needs in the US 522 Corridor. Bicycle A series of bicycle improvements are proposed in the corridor, including a network of potential bicycle connections that can be incorporated as part of shared use trails or side paths. While there is currently a lack of non -motorized amenities, the Win -Fred MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Plan calls for a series of proposed bicycle improvements in the vicinity of the US 522 study corridor. These facilities are recommended to be at least 10 feet wide to meet space requirements for accessibility and bicycle movements and they do adhere to the MPO Draft Bike Plan adopted in 2007. These improvements include a 7.12 mile long on -road facility for US 522 from 1-81 in the City of Winchester, to Double Tollgate in Clarke County. In addition to the proposed on -road facility along US 522, multiple east -west connections to US 522 are also proposed in the form of multi- use trails and on -road facilities of perpendicular roadways. On -road bicycle facilities or multi -use trails are proposed on the following roadways that cross or connect to the US 522 Corridor: ® Millwood Pike Justes Drive Warrior Drive ® Airport Road Evendale Lane West Parkins Mill Road + Tasker Road The Federal Highway Administration has traditionally defined three types of bicycle users (A, B and C) to assist in describing different facility types and roadway conditions for bicyclists. Group A includes advanced or experienced riders who are comfortable riding with motor vehicle traffic. Group B includes basic or less confident adult riders, and Group C includes children riders. Future bicycle planning initiatives are moving 70 DRAFT - Route S22 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 away from the traditional group types (A, 8, and C) and are addressing riders through more detailed descriptions of trip types and rider experience level and designing appropriate facilities based on the intended use. Pedestrian The proposed pedestrian improvements include the shared and multi -use trails indicated in the MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. In addition to the MPO recommendations, this study also calls for specific pedestrian safety improvements based on the context zone designs for each section of the US 522 Corridor. Specific pedestrian improvements should be made in the vicinity of the Interstate 81 interchange and in the commercial areas of northern Frederick County. These investments are needed to meet demand for walking between shopping destinations and residential development and to ensure that pedestrians can traverse the US 522 Corridor in a safer pedestrian environment. Due to the increase of vehicular and pedestrian traffic the following recommendations are suggested to enhance pedestrian safety at intersections within Winchester south to Airport Road in Frederick County: a Install Pedestrian Crossing signs along the 1-81 exit ramps Implement Pedestrian crosswalks and signals at intersections that connect commercial properties to other commercial developments, residential areas, or institutional areas (e.g. Shenandoah University across US r 522 to Apple Blossom Mall). ® As part of the design, additional enhancements such as median pedestrian refuges, traffic calming measures, signage, and other safety features should be considered and implemented as appropriate In addition to the implementation of a comprehensive trail system, enhanced sidewalk connections, and a new multi -use trail along US 522, the access management recommendations and transit investments should also enhance the pedestrian experience in the corridor. The access management recommendations will reduce the number of curb cuts along the corridor, and thus, also reduce potential vehicular — pedestrian conflict points significantly. Design enhancements and streetscape improvements that enhance the pedestrian scale should also be implemented as part of making investments in the corridor. These types of enhancements, such as pedestrian - scale lighting, wide sidewalks, additional plantings, and implementation of benches, 71 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 receptacles and other amenities will serve as an indication to drivers that they need to change their behavior as they enter a more pedestrian -oriented corridor. Warren County has plans to build a multi -use trail along the Crooked Run Shopping Center from Interstate 66 to the north. This trail will tie into the sidewalks of the development and will allow for further expansion to the north as development occurs. Transit Currently, the US 522 Corridor is only served by one public transportation route, the Apple Blossom Mall Route. Based on the Transit Services Plan for Win -Fred Metropolitan Planning Organization, it is recommended that the Apple Blossom Mall route be extended south along US 522. Extending the route would provide transit service to the Winchester Airport, the Virginia Employment Commission and the Delco Plaza retail center. Extending the current route 4.7 miles to the south would increase the headway of the route to an hour, therefore doubling the amount of time it takes to complete the current route. The Town of Front Royal has plans to extend the Front Royal Area Transit (FRAT) service north to the commercial area of Warren County, north of the Interstate 66 interchange. At a minimum, the Town of Front Royal would like to see a two-hour weekday evening service from Front Royal to the commercialized area of Warren County. Funding is currently not available to provide this service. Efforts to solicit private funds from the commercial property managers have come up empty thus far. Extending transit routes in the study area would not only provide alternative access to commercial areas, but would also reduce vehicle demand on the US 522 Corridor and contribute to maintaining the functionality of the corridor. In addition to extending transit service along the corridor, other transit amenities are also recommended. Provision of additional transit and transit amenities in the corridor such as benches and shelters will also aid in converting the corridor from an auto -dominated corridor into a more multimodal corridor. Providing exclusive pull -off areas for the buses would also add to a more multimodal corridor and provide additional safety to the riders and operators of the transit service. Longer term additional transit service could be provided to the recommended park-and- ride lot located on Millwood Pike, just east of the US 522 intersection. By providing transit services to park -and ride lots, alternative means of transportation are provided for transit service locally into Winchester. 72 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 Park & bode One new Park & Ride lot is proposed within the study area. This proposed lot is recommended to be situated along Millwood Pike, just east of Interstate 81 and would be constructed as land use changed in the corridor. This lot would serve local transit trips as well as persons interested in forming carpools, vanpools, etc. By locating this lot near major cross -routes, there would be higher potential to capture multiple origins and destinations in the corridor. Travel Demand Management Travel demand management (TDM) programs can further decrease the traffic impacts of development in the US 522 Corridor. A number of programs can be developed, many of which could coordinate with or be supported by the regional ridesharing and travel demand management programs of the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (NSVRC). For example, the Valley Commuter Assistance Program (VCAP) is a "free ride -matching service that provides users the opportunity to connect with individuals who use similar commuting patterns." The VCAP offers coordination of carpooling, vanpooling, commuter buses and other services. The VCAP can help determine other commuting options or alternatives that fit individual's schedules. The VCAP can be beneficial by providing these services within the US 522 Corridor. The TDM strategies most relevant to the study area are ridesharing, flextime, and telecommuting. Employers who support these programs will help reduce peak period congestion. Specifically, ridesharing reduces vehicle trips through carpooling or vanpooling, but for success would need to be supported by a Guaranteed Ride Home program. Flextime has to be promoted by individual employers, but when successfully implemented, it serves to spread work trips across a longer period of time in the mornings and evenings, reducing peak congestion. Telecommuting options offered by local employers would reduce trips in the area, and incorporation of telework center(s) in the corridor would help reduce regional travel. In working with developers, the starting point for TDM programs may include designated parking for carpools and vanpools. A coordinated plan for the corridor, which could be incorporated into a corridor overlay plan, should include goals or targets for park and ride facilities and telework centers. These are items that could be proffered if corridor - level goals were established. Another mechanism to encourage success with TDM strategies is the establishment of a Transportation Management Association for the corridor. This would be a public-private agency supported by the Win -Fred MPO and NSVRC and corridor employers to provide information, coordination, and administration of travel demand management programs to foster their implementation and fulfillment of travel reduction goals. Programs should be available to encourage TDM strategies including subsidizing costs, rebates to employers, and other benefits. 73 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 TDM strategies have been successful in many areas including Arlington, Virginia (Arlington County Commuter Services) and Montgomery County, Maryland (Montgomery County Commuter Services). Freight As discussed in the existing and future conditions sections, there are no pressing needs for making freight improvements in the Route 522 Corridor. As downward economic trends begin to rise, freight movement along the corridor should be monitored to identify potential freight facility deficiencies and other roadway impacts. Further freight study, including future projections and origin -destination data / surveys, would present a better understanding of freight uses in the corridor. Project Prioritization The recommendations provided in this chapter are intended to provide the localities and VDOT with a tool to ensure that as development occurs within the US 522 Corridor study area, the capacity and safety of the corridor are maintained. The recommendations also provide a blueprint of the ultimate corridor so roadway and intersection improvement projects can be implemented and pursued in a fashion that results in a well-planned corridor with good operational characteristics. The recommendations provided should be prioritized by the jurisdictions, based on need, expected cost, and overall feasibility. Recommendations receiving a high priority should be improvements that are expected to correct existing deficiencies and that could be implemented without significant impact to existing structures or development. Other high priority recommendations should include starting the project improvement process on the large scale items, including the grade separation at Jubal Early Drive, the relocation of US 522 and any lane widening projects. Recommendations receiving a low priority should be projects at locations without immediate need or locations expected to be cost intensive without significant impact on the overall corridor. 74 DRAFT - Route 522 Multimodal Corridor Study - September 2010 f� \ v Q \ 41 ep is 7z 'Op.� 4,c eep Item 5: Other