Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-09 DMJ Holdings LLC - Shawnee 2.85 acres RP to B2 for Commer. - Backfile
REZONING TRACKING SHEET Check List: Application Form ✓ Fee & Sign Deposit Proffer Statement —� Deed Impact Analysis ✓ Plat/Survey Adjoiner List Taxes Paid Statement ✓ g 2 i File opened ( Reference manual updated/number assigned l O D-base updated g 0 Copy of adjoiner list given to staff member for verification Color location maps ordered from Mapping Application Action Summary updated ' Planning Commission Meeting ACTION: Board of Supervisors Meeting ACTION: Signed copy of Resolution received from County Administrator and placed in Proffers Notebook together with proffers l t / 5 Approval (or denial) letter mailed to applicant/copy to file and cc's C Reference manual updated (� Ekj D-base updated 0 /5 Application Action Summary updated Q File given to Mapping to update zoning map Zoning map amended Sys ID # Lo a i 9 x foll RECEIVED FROM DATE o 1 U 1 LLC No. 1193 cDDRESS 1q �,ro�t 116 L6y'Y-,CYL,0t3::k VjA ZZ-1O113 611y OLLARS S ( 0 1 °2' 85 U JJ FOR RENT FOR ' 1lYrilM T CJIr�Qt�Y�^S� �� �UV+�l. AMT OF CASH ACCOUNT AMT. PAID 1 � 2 CHECK � � J J BALANCE MONEY DUE ORDER BY DATE NO. 119 4 RECEIVED FROM -f" AWRESS6� hLi `? - DOLLARS $ JFOR RENT&: J FOR • • ,MT OF CASH ACCOUNT AMT PAID CHECK 0 3 BALANCE MONEY DUE ORDER tar 5o G,",) C Zdn; Traffic Impact Study Millwood Pike and Custer Drive, Frederick Co., VA March 4, 2009 Prepared for DMJ Holdings, LLC 195 Ebert Road Winchester, VA 22603 r c ", 3< Q r TIMOTH S. STOWE >- No. 21924 'k Prepared by Stowe Engineering, PLC 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 T1 lfle of Contents Background....................................................................................................................................................1 Future Transportation Improvements..................................................................................................1 SiteLocation..........................................................................................................................................1 StudyArea.............................................................................................................................................3 NearbyZoning.......................................................................................................................................3 ExistingRoadways.................................................................................................................................3 Programmed Roadway Improvements.................................................................................................4 Proposed Development.........................................................................................................................4 ExistingTraffic Conditions.............................................................................................................................5 Future Conditions without Development (Background)...............................................................................6 Trip Generation & Distribution......................................................................................................................7 TripGeneration.....................................................................................................................................7 Pass -By Trips..........................................................................................................................................7 TripDistribution....................................................................................................................................7 Future Conditions with Development(2014)................................................................................................9 DesignYear (2020)......................................................................................................................................11 Recommended Improvements....................................................................................................................10 PedestrianTraffic................................................................................................................................11 BicycleTraffic.......................................................................................................................................13 Conclusions..................................................................................................................................................13 Appendix A — Traffic Count Data Appendix B — Existing Signal Timing Data Appendix C — Synchro LOS Reports Appendix D — Pre -Scope of Work Meeting Form Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Background Background This Traffic Impact Study has been prepared to support the rezoning request for the DMJ Holdings property located in the north-west quadrant at the intersection of Millwood Pike and Custer Drive. The project area fronts on Millwood Pike (Route 50 & 17) and Custer Drive (Route 781). The project area is 2.80 acres in size and is currently undeveloped with the exception of a vacant house. The current zoning of the property is Residential Performance and the requested zoning is Business B-2. The proposed development will consist of a 60 room hotel and a convenience store with eight fueling positions. The project is planned to be fully constructed in 2014. Future 7'i-ailspoi'tation )(nlpi'ovelileilts The proposed project is located within the Virginia Department of Transportation's Edinburg Residency area of responsibility. The Edinburg Residency comes under the oversight of the VDOT Staunton District. The VDOT Six Year Improvement Plan as presented on the VDOT web site does not show any planned projects in the vicinity of the proposed development. The project also falls within the jurisdiction of the Win -Fred Metropolitan Planning Organization. A review of the MPO's Long Range Plan shows Millwood Pike being widened to six lanes (three lanes in each direction). However the Constrained Long Range Plan does not include this widening project. Site Location The project site is located in Frederick County, VA approximately 0.7 miles east of the 1-81 interchange with Route 50/17. The area has gentle grades that drain towards the natural swale at the front of the property. Figure 1 provides a Vicinity Map for the project and Figure 2 shows the existing conditions of the site. Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Background Ilrl�n•afy � ,��•:,�� fI�J yvi d Cr 4 Project Location 'vt p • :,fy 50 S?2 � • •17 J ' T i Figure 1 Vicinity Map (source: maps.google.com) Figure 2 Existing Conditions Map (source: Frederick Co, VA GIS) Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Background �tuflyArea For the purposes of this Traffic Impact Study, the limits of the study extend along Millwood Pike from its intersection with Prince Frederick Drive to its intersection with Ryco Lane. The study area extends from the site westward along Millwood Pike a distance of about 1,300 feet, and to the east a distance of about 1,250 feet. Nearhv Zoning Figure 3 shows the existing zoning for the subject property as well as the surrounding zoning. Existing land uses to the north, east and west are residential, with commercial to the south. A vacant lot lies to the immediate east of the site. 7 tir Proiect Location h �r ItDivision. I/� d�rickCo$nt jnfor[ptio *chnoloeNs, nia. nit' t3tls. 540.665-5614 Frederick Courtly does not grve any expressed or impUeU warranties. concMions, representations, rndermAies of any kind, statutory or Merwee concemaW aM or all of the Frederick County GIS gets Figure 3 Zoning Map ll P-1 ,,r ,,eraar ��.nu�oyaowrtry ■wbwr.h��....� L ■ s. a....Y. c.�.r�o.n YMrt•�.J.I�.Dwwr ■1 pw�rw.� Gwrd..nl ■ w• Y.vfa N._.Owrwwl �N •r .4. Mr./.r�..vUac1 I'Aisting Roadways Figure 1 shows the existing roadways in the vicinity of the project. Millwood Pike in the vicinity of the project is a 4-lane divided highway. Other roadways in the study area are roadways with a 2-lane typical section with some intermittent curb and gutter. Turn lanes exist at the intersections of Millwood Pike and Prince Frederick Drive. Continuous left turn lanes (one lane in each direction) begin just east of the intersection of Millwood Pike and Purdue Drive, and continue west for about 1,700 feet. Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Background II 70 Programmed Roadway Improvements There are no programmed improvements in the VDOT Six Year Improvement Plan or the MPO Constrained Long Range Plan that fall in the vicinity of this proposed project. Improvements to the intersection of Millwood Pike and Prince Frederick Drive have been proffered by the Governor's Hill project. Proposed Development The proposed development consists of a 60 room hotel and a convenience store with eight fueling positions. Access will be provided via a right in only entrance from Custer Drive, and a right -in right -out connection to the west bound lanes of Millwood Pike. Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Background `� Existing Traffic Conditions To analyze the existing 2009 traffic conditions manual turning movement counts were conducted during the weekday PM and Saturday mid -day peak times at the intersections of Millwood Pike with Custer Drive/Prince Frederick Drive, Purdue Drive, and Ryco Lane. A map and photographs of these intersections is contained in Figure 5. An Average Daily Traffic volume was computed from the VDOT Annual Average Daily Traffic Volume Estimates for Route 50/17 which reported a 'K factor' of 0.079. This was applied to the peak hour turning movement volumes to compute the ADT for the adjacent streets. The existing PM and Saturday peak hour turning movements were analyzed using the Synchro 7.0 traffic modeling software. The peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 6, and the existing lane geometry and modeling results (levels of service and delays) are shown in Figure7 and Table 1. Table 1 Existing Level of Service and Approach Delay PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Intersection Type of Approach Level of Delay Level of Delay Control Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) Millwood Drive and Signalized NB D 43.3 C 29.3 Pr. Frederick Dr. SB D 54.2 D 46.3 Custer Drive EB C 24.4 C 22.7 WB C 30.5 C 23.7 Millwood Drive and Unsignalized SB A 9.2 B 11.5 Purdue Drive EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized NB C 17.5 C 18.1 Ryco Lane EB WB Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Existing Traffic Conditions r Figure 5 Map of Studied Intersections Traffic Impact Study_for DMJ Holdings Development a 0 a' a' MilliyoadPike �` `� CAD 0 6 p �. v C c o 0 c� Custer Dr e t /01, 76 6(6/0 /a(7as0)Jy 1 6, (65) ) s' 00` hpUy` 17 you 0 Y U O O �l O U C 4 NOT TO SCALE PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) TMOTTSIM 6 Existing 2009 ADT and PM/Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Traffic Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development ............................................ m 0 0 a' Millwood Plke m Q RR U V 0 Custer Or .� c(c) C(C) Vr 17 a U O a O a U C Q NOT TO SCALE PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) Figure 7 Existing 2009 Lane Geometry and Level of Service Traffic Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development Future Conditions without Development (Background) Future (Background) conditions in 2014 without the development were established by growing the existing 2009 traffic at 2% per year to the build -out year of 2014 (5 years of growth). The growth factor of 2% was determined by VDOT Staunton District Planning staff and is based on the historical and anticipated growth in traffic volumes in the project area. The existing traffic (that collected in the count program) on all roadways in the study area was grown at this rate. The roadway network is unchanged from the Existing Conditions (2009 conditions). In addition to the organically grown background traffic, impacts associated with the nearby Governors Hill were considered and included. Based upon a review of A Traffic Impact Analysis of Governors Hill Development, PHR&A, 8/14/2008, the Governor's Hill project will generate 1425 PM and 1754 Saturday peak hour trips in Phase 1, and 3304 PM and 3717 Saturday peak hour trips in Phase 2. For the Background conditions, 50% of the Phase 1 traffic was included. The Background PM and Saturday peak hour turning movement volumes were analyzed using the Synchro 7.0 traffic modeling software. The peak traffic volumes are shown in Figure 8, and the Background lane geometry and modeling results (levels of service and delays) are shown in Figure 9 and Table 2. Table 2 Background Level of Service and Approach Delay PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Intersection Type of Approach Level of Delay Level of Delay Control Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) Millwood Drive and Signalized NB D 36.3 C 28.8 Pr. Frederick Dr. SB D 35.4 C 34.3 Custer Drive EB C 26.8 C 22.8 WB D 42.3 C 25.7 Millwood Drive and Unsignalized SB A 9.6 A 9.2 Purdue Drive EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized NB C 24.1 D 26.3 Ryco Lane EB WB Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Future Conditions without Development (Background) t 0 a 0 Q 0 d pike o`oo� 11 '� 67 ) y .� Q 6 s) S r `o � Custer Dr 781 63°,s9r 1) , — 70 9) 2 U16 ') ti ) 17 a Y U O J U 4 0 c C NOT TO SCALE PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) Figure 8 2014 Background ADT and PM /Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Ti-aff c Impact Study foi- DMJ Holdings Development r 0 0 D Q, ��lill�yood prke Q e�AJ y O U CID 0 U� Custer Dr CSC% `a Vr 17 a U O J b O U C C NOT TO SCALE PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) Figure 9 2014 Background Lane Geometry and Levels of Service D-aff c Impact Study for• DMJHoldings Development Trim Generation & Distribution Trip Generation Trip generation for the project was developed by the application of the trip generation rates from the ITE Trip Generation manual, 71h edition. The land uses proposed for the development were provided by the developer's site engineer. Full build -out is planned to occur by the year 2014 therefore the trip generations for all proposed land uses were developed in a single phase for that year. The trips expected to be generated by this development and are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 Trip Generation PM Peak Hour Saturday ITE Avg. Avg. Midday Midday Midday Land Use Code Amount Daily in Out Total Daily Pk Hr Pk Hr Pk Hr Trips Trips In Out Total Hotel - 60 rooms 310 60 535 26 20 46 630 26 26 52 Con. Store w/ 8 fueling positions 853 8 4,341 80 80 160 1,636 42 39 81 Sub -Total 4,876 106 100 205 2,266 68 65 134 Pass -By Trips of Conv. Store Con. Store w/ 8 fueling positions 853 8 4,341 80 80 160 1,636 42 39 81 Pass By at 40% (1,736) (32) (32) (64) (654) (17) (16) (33) Total New Trips 3,140 74 68 141 1,611 51 50 101 Pass -fay Trips The very nature of a convenience store is to reduce vehicular trips by providing opportunities to combine shopping trips with other trips. To account for this phenomena 'pass -by' trips were calculated. Pass -by trip reductions consider site trips drawn from the existing traffic stream on an adjacent street, recognizing that trips drawn to a site would otherwise already traverse the adjacent street regardless of existence of the site. Pass -by trip reductions allow a percentage reduction in the forecast of trips otherwise added to the adjacent street from the proposed development. The reduction applies only to volumes on adjacent streets, not to ingress or egress volumes at entrances serving the proposed site. The internal capture and pass -by trips computed for the project are shown in Table 3. Trip Distribution Trips generated by the DMJ Holdings development were assigned to the network based on a distribution developed with the VDOT Staunton District Planning staff. The distribution takes into account the Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Trip Generation & Distribution majority of trips are expected to travel east and west along Millwood Pike. The remaining traffic will travel to and from the north where the residential area is located. The distribution and assignment of trips is shown in Figures 10 and 11. The assignment of Pass -By trips is shown in Figure 12. Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Trip Generation & Distribution •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1f a a 0 a' a' co Mqi„ro ory e F/k 55% S/TF Custer Dr 15% �v 781 17 30% s r U O a O O U C NOT TO SCALE Figure 10 Trip Distribution Percentages Traffic Impact Study for DNIJ Holdings Development 0 a G a� Q, Mill wOpC Pik CID e 37(20) 5 ti 5(36 4q(2gJJ �o v 0 r 1601) � 1 Custer Dr y 90(57) 781 Q � 9(9 of 51(33) 3,9(" `► ti 17 0 s U O a O 4 0 U C Q PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE _ . � _ � Figure 11 2014 Development Generated ADT and PM/Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Traffic Impact Study for- DMJ Holdings Development t m n 0 D� QJ Milli�a� Pike ti //8(-9) o Custer Dr c o` 781 r� •9(-S� -to(_S� ti 17 a Y O 6 4 0 U C Q NOT TO SCALE PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) _ . � _ � _ Figure 12 2014 Pass By ADT and PM/Saturday Peak Hour Trips Traffic Impact Study for• DILIJHoldings Development Future Conditions with Development (2014) The full build out of the DMJ Holdings project is expected to occur in the year 2014. The development will have a right -in right -out access onto the westbound lanes of Millwood Pike. A secondary entrance will be provided from Custer Drive into the site. Each of these entrances was modeled as unsignalized intersections. For the purposes of this scenario no other roadway improvements were modeled. The trips generated by the proposed development were combined with the background traffic to derive the traffic expected following the complete build out of the development in 2014. These Build -out PM and Saturday peak hour turning movement volumes were analyzed using the Synchro 7.0 traffic modeling software. The peak traffic volumes are shown in Figure 13, and the Background lane geometry and modeling results (levels of service and delays) are shown in Figure 14 and Table 4. Table 4 Build -out Level of Service and Approach Delays PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Intersection Type of Approach Level of Delay Level of Delay Control Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) Millwood Drive and Signalized NB D 43.5 C 30.3 Pr. Frederick Dr. SB D 40.8 D 36.9 Custer Drive EB C 26.2 C 26.1 WB D 42.9 C 26.5 Millwood Drive and Unsignalized SB A 9.6 A 9.2 Purdue Drive EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized NB D 26.6 D 28.0 Ryco Lane EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized SB B 10.0 A 9.7 New Entrance/exit EB WB Custer Drive and Unsignalized WB New Entrance SB NB Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Future Conditions with Development (2014) m a� 0 a' 4� M/�i�odP'ke oC o co o � 83Tr3, ti 53(700 a � �. zr2 ') 'pnps> 1 3pr�) SST T a — 16(11) Custer Dr 90(sa) ^`yam ^` 781 9(79) ,2gzf75) o2o(a») 6So r178) Y 7p (72) (gyp 2pra,)ai ry 17 0 U O a O O U C PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE _ _ � _ � _ Figure 13 2014 Build Out ADT and PM /Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Traffic Impact Study for DMJHoldings Development 00***00000*0000009000000000000000*00000000*01 -��-- a� 0 a� a' Q co V a m 0 Custer Dr S °� 781 ti C(C) VT 17 0 Y U O a O �L O U C a` PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE Figure 14 2014 Build Out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service Traffic Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development Recommended Improvements Based on a review of A Traffic Impact Analysis of Governors Hill Development, PHR&A, 8/14/2008, it appears the proffered improvements for the intersection of Millwood Pike and Prince Frederick Drive described therein are adequate to facilitate the traffic from the Governors Hill project as well as the normal traffic growth in the area. With Phase 2 of the Governors Hill project the following improvements are proffered: • Construction of a second northbound left turn lane • Extension of the storage for the northbound right turn lane • Extension of the storage for the eastbound left turn lane • Extension of the storage for the westbound left turn lane However, there are no proffered improvements for the Custer Drive leg of the intersection. Given that three of the four legs of this intersection are being improved by the Governors Hill project, and that the remaining leg is adjacent to the DMJ Holdings project, the following improvements are recommended: 1. Construct an additional southbound lane from the proposed entrance on Custer Drive, to Millwood Pike. This lane will serve as a right turn lane for south bound traffic. 2. Restripe the pavement on Custer Drive at the intersection of Millwood Pike to delineate a right turn lane, and a combined through -left turn lane. The PM and Saturday peak hour turning movement volumes were modeled with these improvements in place using the Synchro 7.0 traffic modeling software. The traffic volumes are shown in Figure 15, and the Background lane geometry and modeling results (levels of service and delays) are shown in Figure 16 and Table 5. By implementing these improvements the levels of service and roadway operational conditions remain acceptable and manageable. The level of service for northbound Ryco Lane is reported to be LOS D for the PM and Saturday peak hours. However, this reported LOS is not believed to be representative of the actual field condition. This is because Millwood Pike in this area has a continuous left turn lane in each direction, in addition to the two through lanes in each direction (total of six lanes, undivided). This configuration allows northbound vehicles to cross the east bound lanes of Millwood Pike and yield in the west bound left turn lane until an opening occurs in the west bound traffic pattern. This movement cannot be modeled in the Synchro software. However, experience and field observations indicate this movement provides a higher level of service than reported herein. Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Recommended Improvements Table 5 Improvement Level of Service and Approach Delays PM Peak Hour Saturdav Peak Hour Intersection Type of Control Approach Level of Service Delay (sec/veh) Level of Service Delay (sec/veh) Millwood Drive and Signalized NB D 43.0 C 30.3 Pr. Frederick Dr. SB C 26.0 C 28.2 Custer Drive EB C 25.4 C 24.2 WB D 35.8 C 24.6 Millwood Drive and Unsignalized SB A 9.6 A 9.2 Purdue Drive EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized NB D 26.6 D 28.0 Ryco Lane EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized SB B 10.0 A 9.7 New Entrance/exit EB WB Custer Drive and Unsignalized WB New Entrance SB A Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. 0 a 0 J, Q 1Nil/�t-pod Pjke o` �� 83 (8z2� Y ti �2(710,01) 10(10)5� 3p(12J S/� r 0 r 16(11) ,S m �� Custer Dr 9p(Sg lb `0 yam^� 781 J 6 O 2prz1n8) 9 118)o0 (72)� o r ti 17 0 r 0 0 0 a NOT TO SCALE PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) Figure 15 2014 w/Improvements ADT and PM /Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Traffic Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development m a� 0 D� Q (0 l�1rll�0� Peke Construct right turn lane from entrance to Millwood Pike. erq� y Ilk qrq� rti. Q3 S/TF ° Custer Dr c O� 60 y 78i c(c) �T 17 0 r U O J 0 V, O U C a PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE Figure 16 2014 w/ Improvements Lane Geometry and Levels of Service Traffic Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development Design Vear (2020) Analysis for all existing and modified intersections in the study area was performed under the forecast . and site traffic conditions for the design year of 2020. The organic traffic volumes were grown at a rate of 2% per year from the Build -out year of 2014 to the Design Year of 2020. Additionally, 25% of the Phase 1 and 35% of the Phase 2 traffic from the Governors Hill project was added to the traffic. The total of these volumes makes up the Design Year PM and Saturday peak hour turning movement volumes • which were analyzed using the Synchro 7.0 traffic modeling software. The peak traffic volumes are • shown in Figure 15, and the Background lane geometry and modeling results (levels of service and • delays) are shown in Figure 16 and Table 6. • Table 6 Design Year Level of Service and Approach Delay • • PM Peak Hour Saturday Peak Hour Intersection Type of Approach Level of Delay Level of Delay Control Service (sec/veh) Service (sec/veh) • Millwood Drive and Signalized NB D 39.9 C 31.9 . Pr. Frederick Dr. SB C 31.5 C 27.4 Custer Drive EB C 27.1 C 29.1 WB D 53.0 D 42.9 • Millwood Drive and Unsignalized SB A 10.0 A 9.7 • Purdue Drive EB WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized NB E 41.2 F 66.9 Ryco Lane EB • WB Millwood Pike and Unsignalized SB B 11.0 B 10.7 New Entrance/exit EB WB Custer Drive and Unsignalized WB New Entrance SB • NB Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. Design Year (2020) co a 0 D Q3 Mil/�yo s>8(2jJ 6(6) ~ �► 1j(11J 8Jti 1 ?(6J�J 3?(?Sj S'�� �n` 0 r 17(12) J j 1p(21) loa(11s2) s 7 6(;�3?J y 5012) 116(262J1Jy r j, 17 a Y 0 a 0 �i 0 u c a PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE _ . 0 _ 1 Figure 17 2020 Design Year ADT and PM /Saturday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Traffic Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development a a° V000, P ke Q ti e(q� Custer Dr G� o SVr 17 Governor's Hill proffers to improve r the intersection of Prince Frederick o Dr and Millwood Pike include a 2nd NB left turn lane, additional storage for the NB right turn lane, e additional storage for the WB left turn lane, and additional storage for the EB left turn lane. PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE FigurelS 2020 Design Year Lane Geometry and Levels of Service Ti-afffc Impact Study for DMJ Holdings Development Pedestrian Traffic A walkway for pedestrian traffic is proposed to connect with Custer Drive to the east of this project, and towards the residential area. Bicycle Traffic Bicycle facilities are not proposed. Conclusions With the construction of the improvements recommended in this report the traffic impacts associated with the DMJ Holdings development become acceptable and manageable. The construction of the Governors Hill proffered improvements at the intersection of Millwood Pike and Prince Frederick Drive further the capacity of this intersection to carry the traffic associated with this project. Traffic Impact Study — Millwood Pike and Custer Dr. I Conclusions �yi Appendix A Traffic Count Data - Stowe Engineering, PLC • 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 File Name : MILLWOOD AND PRINCE FREDERICK - PM • Site Code : 00000001 Start Date : 2/10/2009 Page No : 1 • rrminc Printprl- PM From North From East From South_ From West Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Toml __ Left Thru Right Peds App Tome —[e—ftj Thru I Right I Peds I App Tama Int. Total PM 0 8 16 0 24 22 220 1 0 243 23 20 12 0 55 25 102 2 0 129 451 .04:00 04:15 PM 2 13 25 0 40 15 168 0 0 183 21 12 10 0 43 37 114 6 0 157 423 . 04.30 PM 04:45 PM 3 12 13 0 1 1 15 25 0 28 41 10 17 213 4 187 3 0 0 227 207 29 27 16 23 18 16 0 63 0 66 24 22 118 103 5 5 0 0 147 130 465 444 � Total F 6 48 79 0 1331 64 788 8 0 860 100 71 56 0 227 108 437 18 0 563 1783 PM 2 8 16 •05:00 05:15 PM 0 11 23 •05:30 PM 05:45 PM 0 1 8 17 11 21 • Total 3 38 77 •Grand Total 9 86 156 Apprch % I 3.6 34.3 62.2 • Total % 0.3 2.6 4.7 • 0 26 13 175 6 0 34 6 174 1 0 25 17 171 3 0 33 15 159 3 0 251 115 1467 21 0 7.2 91.5 1.3 0 7.5 3.4 43.9 0.6 0 194 30 13 20 0 63 38 119 3 0 160 443 0 181 15 20 16 0 51 22 99 5 0 126 392 0 191 9 14 12 0 35 16 111 2 0 129 380 0 177 10 12 13 0 35 30 69 2 0 101 346 0 743 64 59 _ 61 0 184 106 398 12 0 516 1561 0 1603 164 130 117 0 411 214 835 30 0 1079 3344 0 39.9 31.6 28.5 0 19.8 77.4 2.8 0 0 47.9 4.9 3.9 3.5 0 12.3 6.4 25 0.9 0 32.3 Out In Total 365 --251 [ _6161 156 861 91— of Right Thru Left Peds 0N n North 2/10/2009 04:00 PM 2/10/2009 05:45 PM Milhvood Pk 8 M Pnc�e Frederck Dr - P o o _ a d 41 F' Left Thru Right Peds L_1661 130 1171_� 0 E-- [ 231 �41� 1_ 6A2i Out In Total Stowe Engineering, PLC 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 File Name : MILLWOOD AND PRINCE FREDERICK - PM . Site Code : 00000001 Start Date : 2/10/2009 Page No : 2 • From North From East From South r_ From West Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds npp r°i°i Left Thru I Right i Peds l npp Ta°i Left Thru Right Peds npp T° ° nt. Tolal Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 eak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM .04:00 PM I 0 8 16 0 24 22 220 1 0 243 23 20 12 0 55 25 102 2 0 129 451 04:15 PM 2 13 25 0 40 15 168 0 0 183 21 12 10 0 43 37 114 6 0 157 423 0 04:30 PM I 3 12 13 0 28 10 213 4 0 227 29 16 18 0 63 24 118 5 0 147 465 04:45 PM 1 15 25 0 41 17 187 3 0 207 27 23 16 _ 0 66 22 103 5 0 130 444 0 Total Volume 6 48 79 0 133 64 788 8 0 860 100 71 56 0 227 108 437 18 0 563 1783 App. Total 4.5 36.1 59.4 0 7.4 91.6 0.9 0 44.1 31.3 24.7 0 ___ _ _1_9.2 77.6 3.2 0 • PHF .500 .800 .790 .000 .811 .727 .895 500 - .000 .885 .862 .772 _778 000 .860 .730 .926 .750 .000 _ 896 .959 • Out In Total • 18 � 320 79 �� 48 —0] Right Thru Left Peds �J 1 �► — -- --- ---- ------ ------------ Peak Hour Data i o�J North O o F- c 00 • Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM m Millwood Pk 8 Prince Frederick Dr - PM Q m m • 0m o� — — �--- �o w m m tO — 0 • a • • 0 • Left Thru Right _Peds • �1001 71 561_._0] —1 • out �In27J Total • 0 • • 0 • • • 0 Jtowc' Engineering, PLC 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No G'rntmc Prinfrrl_ PM millwood and purdue - pm 00007777 2/12/2009 1 Start Time From North I LeR I Thnt Ri ht Pods q fm LCft 0 2 From East Thnt Ri ht Pcds 220 2 184 0 _ n ro.i 0 222 0 186 _ _ From South Lcft Tltru Ri hl 0 0 0 1 0 1 _ _ _ I Pads q r 0 0 _ _ _ i 0 2 _ ___ Left 4 6 From West Thru Ri ht f eds 153 0 139 2 n Tmoi 0 157 0 147 _ Int. Toml .04:00 PM 04:15 PIA 1 0 4 0 5 0 0 4 0 4 384 339 04:455 PM 0 0 2 0 2 0 238 11 0 239 0 0__-0 0 0 8 153 0 0 161 402 Total 1 0 14 0 15 3 852 3 0 858 3 0 I 0 4 23 583 5 0 611 1488 f05:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0 239 I 05:15 PM 0 0 2 0 2 1 265 I •05:30 PNI 0 0 4 0 4 1 227 2 05:45 PM 0 0 4 0 4_ 3 227 1 . Total 0 0 11 0 Il 5 958 5 • Grand Total 1 0 25 0 26 8 1810 8 Apprch % 3.8 0 96.2 0 0.4 99.1 0.4 • Total % 0 0 0.8 0 0.8 0.3 58.2 0.3 • • • • 0 240 1 0 0 0 0 267 3 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 1 0 0 231 0 0 0 0 0 1826 7 0 2 0 0 77.8 I 0 22.2 0 0 58.7 0.2 0 0.1 0 I 6 141 5 0 152 394 3 13 168 1 0 182 454 1 5 143 3 0 151 386 _ 0 --.-8 _ 144__ 3 0 155 _ 390 5 32 596 12 0 640 1624 9 55 1179 17 0 125 33112 I 4A 94.2 1.4 0 0.3 1 1.8 37.9 0.5 0 40.2 I Out In Total Ri ht Thru Left Peds North (z/12/2009 04.0o PM - fO o 2/12/2009 05:45 PM L� cv o� _ K i o N w Millwood Pk &Purdue �- -- M.- s m a J r o 0 i= O �o I , F, Left Thru Peds _Right - 01 C-�I-22-1- - °i I �25 �34 Out In Total Stowe Enginee l-ing, 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 MWL Start Time I Left I Thnt I Right I Peds I Iry T.1.1 I Left I 7 •Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak I of I Prat- P7 — f— Pnti— hit--ti— R—im al 04.45 PM PLC File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : millwood and purdue - pm :00007777 : 2/12/2009 :2 •04:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2 0 238 1 0 239 0 0 0 0 0 I 8 153 0 0 161 402 05:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0 239 1 0 240 1 0 0 0 1 6 141 5 0 152 394 •05:15 PM 0 0 2 0 2 1 265 I 0 267 3 0 0 0 3 13 168 1 0 182 454 05:30 PM 0 0 4 0 4 I 227 2 0 230 0 0 1 0 1 143 3 0 151 386 • Total volume I 0 0 9 0 9 2 969 5 0 976 4 0 1 0 5 _5 32 605 9 0 646 1636 o APP. Total 0 0 too 0 0.2 99.3 0.5 0 80_ 0 20 0 5_93.7 1.4 0 PHF_1 .000 .000 .563 .000 .563 _.500 _914__625 _000 _ __914 333 __000__- _ 250_ _000 -_ __ .417.1_- _ 615 .900_-.450 .000 .887 _ . 001 I I Out _ In Total 9 1 o O_� RI ht Thru Left Peds /-P j i-► Peak Hour Data 6 R t- �- I J O o � North ---—- - -- ----2 co m m i_ m B--:---- I eak Hour egins at 04:45 PM P S rN I-Millwood_Pk_& Purdue m a I i Left Thru Right Peds 11 E- 75:1 F---16] Out In Total I • • cc Stowe Engineering, PLC • 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 File Name : MILLWOOD AND PURDUE - SATURDAY • Site Code : 00007777 Start Date : 2/14/2009 • Page No : 1 • • Crouns Printed- Snhn•dav `I From North [bolaEast Front South From west Start Tinle Left I Thru I Right Peds 1 App T.I.t Left Thnl I Right -Pods I AppTagil Left],'I'hru Ri ht 1'cds App msi _ Left I Thru Right I Pcds A .rm i InI. T°inl .1 1:00 AM 11:15 A1v1 1 0 1 0 8 3 0 9 0 4 1 0 177 182 2 0 0 180 0 182 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 134 2 5 132 0 0 0 143 137 332 323 11:30 AM 1 0 5 0 6 0 167 0 0 167 1 0 0 0 1 7 150 0 0 157 331 . 11:45 AM 1 0 5 0 6 0 184 2 0 186 0 00 0 0_ 4 150 0 0 154 346 dwL Total 4 0 21 0 25 i 1 710 4 0 715 _ 1 0 0 0 1 23 566 2 0 591 1332 •12:00 PM 12:15 PM 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 191 145 0 0 0 0 191 1496 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 152 143 0 0 0 0 156 150 349 297 •1 2:30 PM 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 171 181 1 1 0 0 172 182 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 4 6 154 160 1 1 0 0 159 167 336 354 • -rotal 0 0 9 0 9 1 688 2 0 691 2 0 2 0 4 21 609 2 0 632 1336 . Grand Total 4 0 30 0 34 2 1398 6 0 1406 3 0 2 0 5 44 1175 4 0 1223 2668 ch °/ Appr. I 11.8 0 88.2 0 0.1 99.4 0.4 0 60 0 40 0 I 3.6 96.1 0.3 0 • Total % 0.1 0 1.1 0 1.3 0.1 52.4 0.2 0 52.7 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.2 1.6 44 0.1 0 45.8 • Out In Total [_ 50 Ri ht Thru Left Peds 4-� 1 Li, i North 2/14/2009 1 1:00 AM - - - - - - 2/14/2009 12:45 PM Millwood Pk & Purdue Dr - Saturday__ _ Left_ Thru Right Peds C__3L�—O L zT-- _ol I--6� __ Out In Total • Stowe Engineering, 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City., VA 22655 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No Front 1;_nst Tkieht 1 Peds �eak Hour Analysis From 11:00 AM to 12:45 PM - Peak I of I �—k- Henr rnr Pnfire Ifife mertinn Reoins of I 1 t 15 AM PLC : MILLWOOD AND PURDUE - SATURDAY :00007777 : 2/14/2009 :2 Front South _ __-- I _ From west ft�_Thrt� Right PCdS __(_App Tme1 _ Lcft-_ Thru Right Peds p.7-1 Int. Total •] 1:15 AM 1 0 3 0 4 0 182 0 0 182 0 0 0 0 0 5 132 0 0 137 323 11:30 AM 1 0 5 0 6 0 167 0 0 167 1 0 0 0 1 7 150 0 0 157 331 •1 1:45 AM 1. 0 5 0 6 0 184 2 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 4 150 0 0 154 346 12:00 PM 0 0 2 0 2 0 191 0 0 191 0 0 0 0_ 4 152 0 0 156 349 0 Total Volume 3 0 15 0 18 0 724 2 0 _ 726 _0 1 0 0 0 1 20 584 0 0 604 1349 % A. Total 1 16.7 0 83.3 0 0 99.7 0.3 0 100 _250 0 __000___000 0 0 __.000____250_]__714__ 3.3 96.7 0 0 PHF .750.000 .750 .000 .750 ---------------'-------- .000__948_-_.250__.000-____.950_ ----- .9G1_000000.962 .966 Out In Total 22 _ 1J [_40 ( 11501_ ��_�i Ri hl Thru Lefl Peds v Peak Hour Data O N vJ A,-- F- '2 J -�"' North n �i L --► - ,. 2 N U-4 Peak Hour Begins at 11:15 AM —� o �of 1MiIL%--vocAPK-&-Purdue Dr=Saturday_--.— 1� o l p�� oIa a o w m I r► Left Thru Right _Peds �1 --0 —0� Out In Total Stowe Engineering, PLC 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 File Name : MILLWOOD AND PRINCE FREDERICK - SAT Site Code : 00004321 Start Date : 2/14/2009 Page No : 1 ! Front North Front East _ _ _ From South -Left 1 Thru] Right Peds I_ArrT'! 4 13 14 0 31 From west _ Left Thnt_ Right Peds A�.Toml Int.Toml 24 98 6 0 128 365 Start Time I Lcfl That Ri ht Peds A mom Left Thru Light Peds App_j-i I1:15 AM 5 9 12 0 26 10 169 1 0 180 11:30 AM 3 11 17 0 31 17 144 5 0 166 5 5 16 0 26 26 114 3 0 143 366 1 1:45 Aryl 1 10 24 0 35 25 139 5 _ 0 169 9 7 18 0 34 19 118 3 0 140 378 Total 9 30 53 0 92 52 452 11 0 515 18 25 48 0 91 _ 69 330 12 0 411 1109 • 12:00 PM 4 9 21 0 34 13 158 6 0 177 7 9 17 0 33 32 120 7 0 159 403 PM 7 8 18 0 33 18 120 2 0 140 4 9 17 0 30 26 112 4 0 142 345 .12:15 12:30 NO 2 11 18 0 31 15 155 2 0 172 6 8 13 0 27 27 122 2 0 151 381 PM 5 9 _ 26 _ 0 4020 138 ___ 2 -_ 0 160_ 10 -_ __ 7____ _17 1 _--_ 35.. 21108_ 17 0 146 381 •12:45 Total 18 37 83 0 138 66 571 12 0 649 27 33 64 1 125 106 462 30 0 598 1510 • 01:00 PM •Grand Total Apprch % • Total % • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 8 15 0 24 10 124 2 28 75 151 0 254 128 1147 25 11 29.5 59.4 0 9.8 88.2 1.9 0.9 2.5 5.1 0 8.5 4.3 38.5 0.8 0 136 5 14 20 0 39 34 122 3 0 159 358 0 1300 50 72 132 1 255 209 914 45 0 1168 2977 0 19.6 28.2 51.8 0.4 17.9 78.3 3.9 0 0 43.7 1.7 2A 4.4 0 8.6 7 30.7 1.5 0 39.2 Out In _ Total r- 306] Ri hl Thru Lett Peds hn m North -i--/ - — -- ---2 i 2/14/2009 11:15 AM wET s 2/14/2009 01:00 PMOr r o o� fi o N MQhrrood_Pk_& Prince Frederick__Dr __Satq[day___ Left Thru Right Peds 50j_ 72-1 --t321_._ -HI i L - — - -� [_248 ( 255 �_503J Out In Total Stowe Engineering, PLC 0 0 •i From North I Start Time-1 Left I Thru I Right I Peds I Arn T-1 Left •Peak Hour Analysis Prom 1 1:15 AM to 01:00 PM - Peak 1 of Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 1 1:15 AM 0 11:15 AM 5 9 12 0 26 10 11:30 AM 3 11 17 0 31 17 0 1 1:45 AM 1 10 24 0 35 25 12:00 PM 4 9 21 0 34 13 • Total volume 1 13 39 74 0 126 65 App. Total 10.3 31 58.7 0 _ -9.4 Am PHR I -650 .896 .771 .000 .900 I 650 220 Serviceberry Court Stephens City, VA 22655 File Name : MILLWOOD AND PRINCE FREDERICK - SAT Site Code : 00004321 Start Date : 2/14/2009 Page No : 2 From Cast _ _ rrom South i From west Thru I Ri�lu Pcds _ n ra si ft_I Tltru I Right [ Pcds 1 T-1 Lcfl Thru Right I Pcds A n T-1 I Int. Totnl 1 169 1 0 180 4 13 14 0 31 24 98 6 0 128 365 144 5 0 166 5 5 16 0 26 26 114 3 0 143 366 139 5 0 169 9 7 ]8 0 34 19 118 3 0 140 378 158 _6 0 177 7 917 0 _ 33 __ 32 120_ 7 0 159 403 610 17 0 692 25 34 65 0 124 101 450 19 0 570 1512 88.2 2.5 0 __ 20.2 27.4 52.4 0 — 17.7 789_ 3.3__ 0 .902 .708 .000—.961__ _ _.694 __ _ .654 903__ _ 000 ___912 _ 789_ .938__;679 000 ___—.896 .938 Out In Total 152 � 26 i278 t Z----t F— :7:4= 39 [_ 13 _ 0 Right Thru Left Peds ------------ -------- --------------------------------- Peak Hour Data oI�I A. - J 0 i W. N North /---2 m L m L Peak Hour Begins at 11:15 AM r —IN)= m : _Millwood Pk & Prince_Frederick Dr_ Sat_urday__ 0 Olh O /-1 T f-► Left Right _.Thru _Peds (_i 25 [.__ 34 65I_. _f 01 i [ 123 t 1 - t____247 Out In Total Virginia Deoartment of Transportation Traffic Engineerino Division 2007 Annual Averaqe Daily Traffic Volume Estimates By Section of Route Frederick Maintenance Area Route Jurisdiction Length AADT QA 4Tire Bus Truck QC K QK Dir AAWDT QW 2Axle 3+Axle 1Trail 2Trail Factor Factor F'"" 34-836 1Valtcrs Mill Lane 11 Martinsburg Pike Frederick County 1.56 6900 G 92% 0% 1% 4% 2% 0% C 0.088 F 0.628 7100 G 34-671 Ccdar Hill Rd 11 Martinsburg Pike Frederick County 2.21 5500 G 92% 0% 1% 4% 2% 0% F 0.095 F 0.735 5700 G IF Wcst Vireinia State Linc "..I US Il VallcvAvc �1 Braddock St City of Winchester 0.09 10000 G 93% 1% 3% 2% 1% 0% F 0.095 F 0.75 11000 G Combined Traffic Estimates for 2 Parallel Roadways on this Route: 13000 G 93% 1% 3% 2% 1% 0% F 0.094 F 0.583 14000 G 9 Gerard St 50 9 522 Braddock St City of Winchester 0.53 6700 1% 1% 0% 0% C 0.093 F 7300 G G 97% 1% Combined Traffic Estimates for 2 Parallel Roadways on this Route: 12000 G 96% 1% 1% 1% 1°/ 0% C NA 14000 G Boscawcn St 1p1 5?�2 0 522 Braddock St City of Winchester 0.17 8400 1% 1% 1% 0% F 0.091 F 0.842 9200 G G 96% 1% Combined Traffic Estimates for 2 Parallel Roadways on this Route: 17000 G 96% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% F NA 18000 G 1P Braddock St Piccadilly St City of Winchester 0.36 2500 3% 2% 1% 0% C 0.089 F 2700 G G 93% 1% Combined Traffic Estimates for 2 Parallel Roadways on this Route: 8400 G 94% 1% 3% 1% 1% 0% C NA 9100 G T° North Ave �1 North Ave City of Winchester Braddock St 11/0 0% 0% 0% C 0.114 F 0.719 580 G 0.03 530 G 97% 2% T° Loudoun St 11 Loudoun St `•." North Ave City of Winchester 0.30 3700 1% 0% 0% 0% C 0.079 F 0.766 4100 G G 99% 0% Combined Traffic Estimates for 2 Parallel Roadways on this Route: 9600 G 96% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% C NA 11000 G �1 Loudoun St F,... W,,ck St City of Winchester 0.24 5200 1 % 0% 0% 0% F 0.089 F 0.764 5700 G G 99% 0% Combined Traffic Estimates for 2 Parallel Roadways on this Route: 11000 G 97% 1% 2% 1 % 1% 0% F 0.082 F 0.714 12000 G T. US I I Cameron St 17 50 Millwood Pike Clads County Une Frederick County 2.72 13000 G 1% 1% 2% 0% F 0.088 F 0.643 14000 G 96% 1% 17 50 Millwood Pike Frederick County 2.71 22000 G 96% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% F 0.079 F 0.511 21000 G 0.16 38000 G 96% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% F 0.079 N 0.511 41000 G RV F. I-s t 17 50 522 Millwood Ave City of Winchester 0.09 28000 N 96% 0% 1% 1% 1% 0% N 0.083 F 0.649 29000 N Jubal Early Dr US 50 Par, Milhvood Ave 17 50 522 Jubal Early Dr City of Winchester 0.06 28000 G 96% 0% 1% 1% 1% 0% C NA 29000 G T° I Apple Blossom Dr 5/14/2008 1 • • • • Appendix B • i Traffic Signal Timings • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Phase Vehicle Basic Timing Data Date 2/20/201 Timc 14:20:10 17/50/781, Winchester Intersection Name Source Database Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Minimum Green 8 20 8 8 8 20 0 0 Passage 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.0. 3,0 Maximum 1 15 40 25 15 25 40 0 0 Maximum 2 15 25 15 12 15 25 0 0 Yellow Change 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Red Clearance 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 Pliase 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Miniinum Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Passage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maximum 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Maximum 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow Change 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Red Clearance 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 Page I of I Coordination Mode Data Date 2/20/2009 Time Id:21 Intersection Name 17/50/781, Winchester Source Database Operation Mode I -Auto Mode (Normal) 0-perm Maximum 0-lnhibil Correction 2-Short Way Offset Mode 0-BCA Green Force Mode 0-plan Max Dwell Time 0 Yield Period 0 Manual Controls: Dial I Split 1 Offset I 1 Coordination Timing Plan Data - Dial 3 Solit 1 Date 2/20/200 Time 14:21 Intersection Name 17/50/781, Winchester Source Database Cycle Length 90 Ring Sum'fimes 90 58 0 0 Phase Phase I Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 Phase 7 Phase 8 Time 25 33 16 16 15 43 0 0 Mode 0-Actuated 1-Coord Ph 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated I-Coord Ph 6-Ph Omit 6-Ph Omit I'll Min Veil Sery 14 26 14 14 14 26 4 Ll Ph Min Ped Sery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Phase Phase 9 Phase 10 Phase 1 I Phase 12 Phase 13 Phase 14 Phase 15 Phase 16 Time 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mode 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated Ph Min Veh Sery 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Ph Min Ped Sery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Offset Offset I Offset 2 Offset 3 Time 55 0 0 Mode 0-Normal 0-Normal 0-Normal Alternate Sequence 1 0 0 Ring 2 Lag Time 0 0 0 Ring 3 Lag Time 0 0 0 Ring 4 Lag Time 0 0 0 2 Coordination Timing Plan Data - Dial 4 Snlit 1 Date 2/20/200 Time 14:21 Intersection Name 17/50/781, Winchester Source Database Cycle Length 120 Ring Sum Times 120 72 0 0 Phase Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 Phase 7 Phase 8 Time 26 46 28 20 16 56 0 0 Mode 0-Actuated I-Coord Ph 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated I-Coord Ph 6-Ph Omit 6-Ph Omit Ph Min Veil Sery 14 26 14 14 111 26 4 4 Ph Min Ped Sery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Phase Phase 9 Phase 10 Phase I I Phase 12 Phase 13 Phase 14 Phase 15 Phase 16 Time 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mode 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated 0-Actuated Ph Min Veh Sery 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Ph Min Pod Sery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Offset Offset I Offset 2 Offset 3 Time 52 0 0 Mode 0-Normal 0-Nor111a1 0-Normal Alternate Sequence el 0 0 Ring 2 Lag Time 0 0 0 Ring 3 Lag Time 0 0 0 Ring 4 Lag Time 0 0 0 3 Local TBC Traffic Data Datc 2/20/2009 Time 14:21:32 Intersection Nnme 17/50/781, Winchester Source Database Day HH Pattern Phase 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Func I 1 1 0 1 Free(OFF=4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 5 40 3/1/1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 11 0 4/1/1 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 19 0 3/1/1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 22 0 Free(OFF=4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 0 1 Free(OFF=4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 5 40 3/1/1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 15 0 4/1/1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 20 0 Free(OFF=4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 it 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Appendix C Synchro LOS Reports • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/6/2009 --* -o- --* f- 4- * t l` '*I Lane Group .... ' EBL EBT EBR : WBL ' WBT WBR' - NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r tT *T r +T+ Volume (vph) 108 437 18 64 788 8 100 71 56 6 48 79 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.997 0.850 0.922 Fit Protected 0.950 0,950 0.973 0.997 Satd. Flow (prot) 1823 3540 1615 1769 3461 0 0 1884 1639 0 1747 0 At Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.973 0.997 Satd. Flow (perm) 1823 3540 1615 1769 3461 0 0 1884 1639 0 1747 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 24 2 72 62 Link Speed (mph) 45 45 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 764 1673 1605 493 Travel Time (s) 11.6 25.3 31.3 11.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.78 0.93 0.75 0.73 0.90 0.50 0.86 0.77 0.78 0.50 0.80 0.79 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 138 470 24 88 876 16 116 92 72 12 60 100 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 138 470 24 88 892 0 0 208 72 0 172 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel , Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2009 Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/6/2009 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 40.0 40.0 15.0 35.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 Total Split (%) 22.5% 44.9% 44.9% 16.9% 39.3% 0.0% 22.5% 22.5% 22.5% 15.7% 15.76% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 34.0 34.0 9.0 29.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 8.0 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 11.6 38.0 38.0 8.8 32.4 13.0 13.0 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.43 0.43 0.10 0.36 0.15 0.15 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.31 0.03 0.50 0.71 0.76 0.24 0.81 Control Delay 46.1 18.9 7.2 48.5 28.7 54.6 10.7 54.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.1 18.9 7.2 48.5 28.7 54.6 10.7 54.2 LOS D B A D C D B D Approach Delay 24.4 30.5 43.3 54.2 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summar Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 89 Actuated Cycle Length: 89 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.81 Intersection Signal Delay: 32.4 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 1-0, 0,2 1 %*' 01 1 i' o4 IN 08 1 05 1 06 2009 Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pk. & Ryco Ln. 3/312009 Movement " " EBT EBR WBL ' WBT NBL ' NBR Lane Configurations tT.) '� tt 'rj'{ Volume (vehlh) 605 9 2 969 4 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.45 0.50 0.91 0.33 0.25 Hourly flow rate (vph) 672 20 4 1065 12 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.82 vC, conflicting volume 692 1223 346 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 692 820 346 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 95 99 cM capacity (vehlh) 912 257 656 Direction, Lane # "" EB '1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2" .'WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 448 244 4 532 532 16 Volume Left 0 0 4 0 0 12 Volume Right 0 20 0 0 0 4 cSH 1700 1700 912 1700 1700 303 Volume to Capacity 0.26 0.14 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 4 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 17.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 17.5 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2009 Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pk. & Purdue Dr. 3/3/2009 • Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt tt Y Volume (veh/h) 32 605 969 5 0 9 Sign Control Free Free Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.62 0.90 0.91 0.63 0.25 0.56 Hourly flow rate (vph) 52 672 1065 8 0 16 • Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) . Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None • Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.80 0.80 0.80 • vC, conflicting volume 1073 1508 536 • vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol . vCu, unblocked vol 582 1128 0 • tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 • p0 queue free % 94 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 799 150 870 Direction, Lane # EB 1 , EB 2 . EB 3 WB 1 WB 2, SB 1 Volume Total 52 336 336 710 363 16 • Volume Left 52 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 8 16 • cSH 799 1700 1700 1700 1700 870 • Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.42 0.21 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.2 • Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.7 0.0 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary • Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2009 Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/3/2009 Lane Group EBL ' EBT EBR . WBL _ WBT WBR NBL . NBT NBR SBL ' SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r tT +T r +T+ Volume (vph) 101 450 19 65 610 17 25 34 65 13 39 74 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.995 0.850 0.919 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.980 0.994 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3505 1599 1787 3491 0 0 1901 1639 0 1736 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.980 0.994 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 3505 1599 1787 3491 0 0 1901 1639 0 1736 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 28 5 72 66 Link Speed (mph) 45 45 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 764 1673 1605 493 Travel Time (s) 11.6 25.3 31.3 11.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.94 0.68 0.65 0.90 0.71 0.69 0.65 0.90 0.65 0.89 0.77 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 128 479 28 100 678 24 36 52 72 20 44 96 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 128 479 28 100 702 0 0 88 72 0 160 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2009 Exisitng Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/3/2009 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 40.0 40.0 15.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 41.0 41.0 15.0 41.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 Total Split (%) 16.7% 45.6% 45.6% 16.7% 45.6% 0.0% 22.2% 22.2% 22.2% 15.6% 15.6% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 35.0 35.0 9.0 35.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 8.0 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 10.5 44.9 44.9 8.8 40.4 9.9 9.9 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.10 0.45 0.11 0.11 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.27 0.03 0.57 0.45 0.42 0.30 0.75 Control Delay 50.9 16.1 6.5 52.3 19.6 43.1 12.4 46.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 50.9 16.1 6.5 52.3 19.6 43.1 12.4 46.3 LOS D B A D B D B D Approach Delay 22.7 23.7 29.3 46.3 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.75 Intersection Signal Delay: 25.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 1-+ 02 1 ir 01 1;* e4 IN 08 1 05 1 06 2009 Exisitng Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pk. & Ryco Ln. 3/312009 ---► -`i► i� w — 4\ Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tT+ tt Y Volume (vehlh) 584 0 0 724 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.25 0.25 0.95 0.25 0.25 Hourly flow rate (vph) 608 0 0 762 4 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 vC, conflicting volume 608 989 304 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 608 867 304 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 99 100 cM capacity (vehlh) 980 279 698 Direction, Lane 4 EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 406 203 0 381 381 4 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 279 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.12 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.1 Lane LOS C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 18.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2009 Exisitng Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pk. & Purdue Dr. 3/6/2009 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt tt` Volume (veh/h) 20 584 724 2 3 15 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.71 0.96 0.95 0.25 0.75 0.75 Hourly flow rate (vph) 28 608 762 8 4 20 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.91 0.91 0.91 vC, conflicting volume 770 1127 385 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 558 949 137 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 98 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 934 232 816 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1 Volume Total 28 304 304 508 262 24 Volume Left 28 0 0 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 8 20 cSH 934 1700 1700 1700 1700 575 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.18 0.18 0.30 0.15 0.04 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 0 0 3 Control Delay (s) 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 11.5 Approach LOS B Intersection'Summary.`,. ' Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2009 Exisitng Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/6/2009 Lane Group EBL . EBT EBR " WBL" WBT WBR. NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r 'j tT +T r + Volume (vph) 119 630 20 70 979 9 110 78 62 7 53 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.999 0.850 0.920 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.972 0.998 Said. Flow (prot) 1823 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 0 1882 1639 0 1745 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.972 0.998 Satd. Flow (perm) 1823 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 0 1882 1639 0 1745 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 1 67 72 Link Speed (mph) 45 45 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 764 1673 1605 493 Travel Time (s) 11.6 25.3 31.3 11.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 , 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 129 685 22 76 1064 10 120 85 67 8 58 95 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 129 685 22 76 1074 0 0 .205 67 0 161 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2014 Background Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/6/2009 ---*, --,, --v "(- �*-- *-- 4\ t �► 1 r Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 31.0 31.0 15.0 31.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 Total Split (%) 18.8% 38.8% 38.8% 18.8% 38.8% 0.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 17.5% 17.5% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 25.0 25.0 9.0 25.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 8.0 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 8.9 29.5 29.5 8.8 26.6 12.5 12.5 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.16 0.16 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.52 0.04 0.39 0.93 0.70 0.21 0.67 Control Delay 49.3 23.2 8.7 39.4 42.5 44.9 9.8 35.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 49.3 23.2 8.7 39.4 42.5 44.9 9.8 35.4 LOS D C A D D D A D Approach Delay 26.8 42.3 36.3 35.4 Approach LOS C D D D InWseeft.Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93 Intersection Signal Delay: 35.8 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. �? o2 f of o4 �I 08 05 2014 Background Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pk. & Purdue Dr. 3/4/2009 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt tt Volume (veh/h) 35 815 1216 6 0 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 38 886 1322 7 0 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.73 0.73 0.73 vC, conflicting volume 1328 1844 664 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 698 1408 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 IC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 659 90 792 Direction, Lane # EB.1 EB 2 EB 3 WB 1 WB 2. SB 1 Volume Total 38 443 443 881 447 11 Volume Left 38 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 7 11 cSH 659 1700 1700 1700 1700 792 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.26 0.26 0.52 0.26 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 10.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 9.6 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary . Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Background Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pk. & Ryco Ln. 3/4/2009 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tT+ tt Y Volume (veh/h) 815 10 2 1216 4 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 886 11 2 1322 4 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.74 vC, conflicting volume 897 1557 448 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 897 1051 448 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 97 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 765 167 563 Direction, Lane. # `: EB.1 EB 2 :'WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 " 'NB 1 Volume Total 591 306 2 661 661 5 Volume Left 0 0 2 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 0 1 cSH 1700 1700 765 1700 1700 194 Volume to Capacity 0.35 0.18 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.03 Queue Length 95th (fl) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 24.1 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 24.1 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Background Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 314/2009 Lane Group EBL ' EBT EBR - WBL . WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT.. SBR Lane Configurations tt r tT +T r +T+ Volume (vph) 111 693 21 72 849 19 28 37 72 14 43 81 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.997 0.850 0.921 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.979 0.995 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3505 1599 1787 3497 0 0 1898 1639 0 1741 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.979 0.995 Satd. Flow (perm) 1805 3505 1599 1787 3497 0 0 1898 1639 0 1741 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 23 3 78 62 Link Speed (mph) 45 45 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 764 1673 1605 493 Travel Time (s) 11.6 25.3 31.3 11.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 121 753 23 78 923 21 30 40 78 15 47 88 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 121 753 23 78 944 0 0 70 78 0 150 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2014 Background Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Ave. 3/4/2009 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 40.0 40.0 15.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 41.0 41.0 15.0 41.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 Total Split (%) 15.6% 42.7% 42.7% 15.6% 42.7% 0.0% 20.8% 20.8% 20.8% 20.8% 20.8% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 35.0 35.0 9.0 35.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 11.1 48.8 48.8 8.8 43.7 9.4 9.4 10.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.51 0.51 0.09 0.46 0.10 0.10 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.42 0.03 0.48 0.59 0.37 0.34 0.61 Control Delay 51.7 18.6 7.4 51.5 23.6 45.9 13.5 34.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.7 18.6 7.4 51.5 23.6 45.9 13.5 34.3 LOS D B A D C D B C Approach Delay 22.8 25.7 28.8 34.3 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summar Area Type: Other Cycle Length. 96 Actuated Cycle Length: 96 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.61 Intersection Signal Delay: 25.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 its and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Ave lip o2 ♦ of o4 'I 08 05 06 2014 Background Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pk. & Ryco Ln. 3/6/2009 Movement LBT EBR WBL WBT NBL 'NBR Lane Configurations Volume (vehlh) Sign Control Grade Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (vehlh) tT tt Y 840 10 0 974 1 0 Free Free Stop 0% 0% 0% 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 913 11 0 1059 1 0 None Direction; Lane # EB 1' Volume Total 609 Volume Left 0 Volume Right 0 cSH 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.36 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 Control Delav (s) 0.0 Lane LOS None 1175 0.82 924 1448 462 924 4.1 2.2 100 748 EB 2 w WB 1 315 0 0 0 11 0 1700 1700 0.19 0.00 0 0 0.0 0.0 Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% Analysis Period (min) 15 1109 462 6.8 6.9 3.5 99 170 WB 2- WB 3 529 529 0 0 0 0 1700 1700 0.31 0.31 0 0 0.0 0.0 3.3 100 552 NB 0 170 0.01 0 26.3 D 26.3 D ICU Level of Service FA 2014 Background Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pk. & Purdue Dr. 3/6/2009 Movement EBL 'EBT WBT' WBR SBL SBR, Lane Configurations tt tt ' Volume (veh/h) 22 840 974 6 0 17 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 24 913 1059 7 0 18 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.81 0.81 0.81 vC, conflicting volume 1065 1566 533 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 603 1223 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 795 137 880 Direction, Lane # ' EB 1 EB 2" EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 SB'1. Volume Total 24 457 457 706 359 18 Volume Left 24 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 7 18 cSH 795 1700 1700 1700 1700 880 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.27 0.27 0.42 0.21 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 0 0 2 Control Delay (s) 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.2 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Background Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pike & Purdue Dr. 3/6/2009 Movement EBL EBT WBU WBT WBR SBL .. SBR Lane Configurations tt A Tt Y Volume (veh/h) 35 837 30 1253 6 0 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 38 910 0 1362 7 0 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.72 0.00 0.72 0.72 vC, conflicting volume 1368 0 1896 684 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 744 0 1474 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 0.0 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 0.0 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 94 0 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 631 0 81 789 Dire'66on,'Lane # EB 1. EB 2'. El3 3 . WB 1 WB 2 WB'3` : SB'1 Volume Total 38 455 455 908 461 0 11 Volume Left 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 7 0 11 cSH 631 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 789 Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.27 0.27 0.53 0.27 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 9.6 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pike & Ryco Ln. 3/4/2009 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT 'NBL NBR Lane Configurations 0 tt Y Volume (veh/h) 837 10 2 1253 4 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 910 11 2 1362 4 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.76 vC, conflicting volume 921 1601 460 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 921 1149 460 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 97 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 750 147 553 Direction, Lane # EB 1 E8.2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 607 314 2 681 681 5 Volume Left 0 0 2 0 0 4 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 0 1 cSH 1700 1700 750 1700 1700 172 Volume to Capacity 0.36 0.18 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 2 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 26.6 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 26.6 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 14: Millwood Pike & Entrance 3/6/2009 • Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR,, SBL.. SBR • Lane Configurations tt tt r Volume (veh/h) 0 857 1216 90 0 100 Sign Control Free Free Yield • Grade -2% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 932 1322 98 0 109 • Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) • Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None • Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 404 pX, platoon unblocked 0.70 0.70 0.70 vC, conflicting volume 1322 1788 661 • vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol . vCu, unblocked vol 616 1277 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) • IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 86 cM capacity (veh/h) 685 113 768 Direction, Larie # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 ' SB 1, Volume Total 466 466 661 661 98 109 • Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 98 109 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 768 Volume to Capacity 0.27 0.27 0.39 0.39 0.06 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 12 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.5 • Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.5 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary - • Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 ± --* -. --* f *- '�- *' 1 r* '* � Lane Group ' EBU EBL EBT' EBR WBL . WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations 'Zi tt r '� fiT +T r 4 Volume (vph) 22 129 650 20 70 1020 9 110 78 62 7 53 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.999 0.850 0.920 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.972 0.998 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1818 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 0 1882 1639 0 1745 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.972 0.998 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1818 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 0 1882 1639 0 1745 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 1 67 65 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 404 1673 1605 189 Travel Time (s) 9.2 38.0 31.3 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 0% 3% 1% 1% 3% 0% 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 24 140 707 22 76 1109 10 120 85 67 8 58 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 164 707 22 76 1119 0 0 205 67 0 161 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment R NA Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 . 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 4/ Lane Group SBR Lan40onfigurations Volume (vph) 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Grade (%) Storage Length (ft) 0 Storage Lanes 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt At Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 0 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 95 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No Lane Alignment Right Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(ft) Detector 2 Size(ft) Detector 2 Type Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 .'* --- 10. --t j -+- 4�' 4� t /0. \D. 1 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 39.0 39.0 15.0 34.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (%) 22.5% 22.5% 43.8% 43.8% 16.9% 38.2% 0.0% 22.5% 22.5% 22.5% 16.9% 16.9% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 14.0 33.0 33.0 9.0 28.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 9.0 9.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 12.1 37.5 37.5 8.6 31.2 12.9 12.9 8.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.42 0.42 0.10 0.35 0.14 0.14 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.47 0.03 0.44 0.92 0.75 0.23 0.70 Control Delay 49.4 21.4 7.8 46.5 42.6 54.1 11.0 40.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 49.4 21.4 7.8 46.5 42.6 54.1 11.0 40.8 LOS D C A D D D B D Approach Delay 26.2 42.9 43.5 40.8 Approach LOS C D D D Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 89 Actuated Cycle Length: 89 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.92 Intersection Signal Delay: 36.9 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Uuster Ur �♦ 4 01 --* o2 04 `I 08 05 06 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group SBR Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) 0.0 Total Split (%) 0.0% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio We Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Summary 2014 Build -out Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 4 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pike & Purdue Dr. 3/6/2009 • Movement EBL EBT WBU 'WBT WBR sk SBR • Lane Configurations tt A tt ''j"' Volume (veh/h) 22 855 22 1001 6 0 17 Sign Control Free Free Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 24 929 0 1088 7 0 18 • Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) • Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None • Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.81 0.00 0.81 0.81 vC, conflicting volume 1095 0 1604 547 • vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol • vCu, unblocked vol 650 0 1278 0 • tC, single (s) 4.1 0.0 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 0.0 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 0 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 767 0 126 884 ' Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 . EB 3 WB 1 , WB 2' W13 3 : SB 1 Volume Total 24 465 465 725 369 0 18 • Volume Left 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 7 0 18 • cSH 767 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 884 • Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.27 0.27 0.43 0.22 0.00 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Control Delay (s) 9.8 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 9.2 • Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 • 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pike & Ryco Ln. 3/4/2009 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT ' . NBL NBR Lane Configurations '� tt Y Volume (veh/h) 855 10 2 1001 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 929 11 2 1088 1 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.82 vC, conflicting volume 940 1483 470 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 940 1159 470 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 IC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 737 158 545 Direction, Lane # EB 1, EB 2 WB 1. WB 2 '.WB 3 NB 1 Volume Total 620 321 2 544 544 1 Volume Left 0 0 2 0 0 1 Volume Right 0 11 0 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1700 737 1700 1700 158 Volume to Capacity 0.36 0.19 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 28.0 Lane LOS A D Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 28.0 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 14: Millwood Pike & Entrance 3/6/2009 Movement EBL. ' EBT WBT WBR SBL 'SBR d Lane Configurations tt tt r r Volume (veh/h) 0 877 974 58 0 65 Sign Control Free Free Yield Grade -2% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 953 1059 63 0 71 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 404 pX, platoon unblocked 0.79 0.79 0.79 vC, conflicting volume 1059 1535 529 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 556 1156 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 92 cM capacity (veh/h) 814 153 866 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 SB 1 Volume Total 477 477 529 529 63 71 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 63 71 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 866 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.28 0.31 0.31 0.04 0.08 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 7 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 Lane LOS A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.5 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Larie Group LBO EBL EBT EBR WBL . WBT WBR NBL NBT " NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations ik tt r '� 0 +T r 4 Volume (vph) 15 118 708 21 72 877 19 28 37 72 14 43 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.997 0.850 0.921 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.979 0.995 Said. Flow (prot) 0 1819 3540 1615 1769 3462 0 0 1898 1639 0 1741 Fit Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.979 0.995 Said. Flow (perm) 0 1819 3540 1615 1769 3462 0 0 1898 1639 0 1741 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 23 2 78 59 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 404 1673 1605 189 Travel Time (s) 9.2 38.0 31.3 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 16 128 770 23 78 953 21 30 40 78 15 47 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 144 770 23 78 974 0 0 70 78 0 150 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment R NA Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex, CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group •r� SBR Lan40onfigurations Volume (vph) 81 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Grade (%) Storage Length (ft) 0 Storage Lanes 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt Fit Protected Said. Flow (prot) 0 Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Said. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 88 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No Lane Alignment Right Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Detector 2 Position(ft) Detector 2 Size(ft) Detector 2 Type Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 40.0% 0.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 14.0 34.0 34.0 14.0 34.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 12.6 48.4 48.4 12.8 45.8 9.5 9.5 10.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.48 0.48 0.13 0.46 0.10 0.10 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.45 0.03 0.34 0.61 0.39 0.34 0.62 Control Delay 53.2 21.6 8.3 43.6 25.2 48.3 14.0 36.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 53.2 21.6 8.3 43.6 25.2 48.3 14.0 36.9 LOS D C A D C D B D Approach Delay 26.1 26.5 30.3 36.9 Approach LOS C C C D Wtef� Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63 Intersection Signal Delay: 27.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr e2 o5 o4 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/612009 •r� Lane Group SBR, Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) 0.0 Total Split (%) 0.0% Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Sunimary 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Entrance & Custer Dr 3/4/2009 Lane Group EBT EBR . 7 WBL . WBT , NEL NER Lane Configurations +T Volume (vph) 0 0 139 8 0 167 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.865 Flt Protected 0.955 Satd. Flow (prof) 0 0 0 1814 0 1644 Flt Permitted 0.955 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 1814 0 1644 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 262 392 189 Travel Time (s) 6.0 8.9 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 151 9 0 182 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 160 0 182 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 0 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 15 9 Sign Control Free Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 13.7% Analysis Period (min) 15 ICU Level of Service A 2014 Build -out Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group ' EBO EBL EBT EBR .-WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Zi tt r 0 +T r � Volume (vph) 22 129 650 20 70 1020 9 110 78 62 7 53 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.999 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.972 0.994 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1818 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 0 1882 1639 0 1889 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.972 0.994 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1818 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 0 1882 1639 0 1889 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 1 67 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 404 1673 1605 189 Travel Time (s) 9.2 38.0 31.3 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 24 140 707 22 76 1109 10 120 85 67 8 58 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 164 707 22 76 1119 0 0 205 67 0 66 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment R NA Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2014 Build -out w/ Improvements PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 31612009 4/ Lane Group SBR Lan gonfigurations Volume (vph) 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Grade (%) Storage Length (ft) 0 Storage Lanes 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt 0.850 Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1615 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 95 Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 95 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 95 Enter Blocked Intersection No Lane Alignment Right Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 Number of Detectors 1 Detector Template Right Leading Detector (ft) 20 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) Detector 2 Size(ft) Detector 2 Type Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2014 Build -out wl Improvements PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 A�� 4 '- A,4� t �► 1 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 39.0 39.0 15.0 34.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (%) 22.5% 22.5% 43.8% 43.8% 16.9% 38.2% 0.0% 22.5% 22.5% 22.5% 16.9% 16.9% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 14.0 33.0 33.0 9.0 28.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 9.0 9.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 12.1 40.5 40.5 8.6 34.1 13.0 13.0 8.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.46 0.46 0.10 0.38 0.15 0.15 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.44 0.03 0.44 0.84 0.74 0.23 0.37 Control Delay 49.4 20.4 7.8 46.5 35.1 53.5 10.9 43.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 49.4 20.4 7.8 46.5 35.1 53.5 10.9 43.8 LOS D C A D D D B D Approach Delay 25.4 35.8 43.0 26.0 Approach LOS C D D C Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 89 Actuated Cycle Length: 89 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.84 Intersection Signal Delay: 32.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 plits and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr j� �♦ 01 -110 o2 o5 I o6 2014 Build -out w/ Improvements PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 4/ Lane Group SBR Permitted Phases 4 Detector Phase 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 Total Split (%) 16.9% Maximum Green (s) 9.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Recall Mode None Act Effct Green (s) 8.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.40 Control Delay 13.7 Queue Delay 0.0 Total Delay 13.7 LOS B Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Summary 2014 Build -out w/ Improvements PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/612009 Lane Group EBU ;. EBL EBT EBk' '.,.WBL,* WBT WBk NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations tt r Vi fiT +T r 4 Volume (vph) 15 118 708 21 72 877 19 28 37 72 14 43 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 200 300 300 0 550 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util, Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.997 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0,950 0.979 0.988 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1819 3540 1615 1769 3462 0 0 1898 1639 0 1877 At Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.979 0.988 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1819 3540 1615 1769 3462 0 0 1898 1639 0 1877 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Said. Flow (RTOR) 23 2 78 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 404 1673 1605 189 Travel Time (s) 9.2 38.0 31.3 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 16 128 770 23 78 953 21 30 40 78 15 47 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 144 770 23 78 974 0 0 70 78 0 62 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment R NA Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Median Width(ft) 12 12 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2014 Build -out wl Improvements Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 ■r/ Lane Grou M Lan4onfigurations r Volume (vph) 81 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Grade (%) Storage Length (ft) 0 Storage Lanes 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt 0.850 Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1615 Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 88 Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 88 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 Enter Blocked Intersection No Lane Alignment Right Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 Number of Detectors 1 Detector Template Right Leading Detector (ft) 20 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) Detector 2 Size(ft) Detector 2 Type Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2014 Build -out w/ Improvements Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3l6/2009 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (%) 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 40.0% 0.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 14.0 34.0 34.0 14.0 34.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 13.1 54.0 54.0 12.8 49.7 9.5 9.5 9.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.54 0.54 0.13 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.40 0.03 0.34 0.57 0.39 0.34 0.36 Control Delay 51.2 19.6 7.7 43.6 23.1 48.3 14.0 47.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.2 19.6 7.7 43.6 23.1 48.3 14.0 47.9 LOS D B A D C D B D Approach Delay 24.2 24.6 30.3 28.2 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length. 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum vlc Ratio: 0.61 Intersection Signal Delay: 25.0 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Guster Ur j� �♦ "e2 f- 01 ♦* o4 �1 08 F 05 06 2014 Build -out w/ Improvements Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 4/ Lane Group SBR Permitted Phases 4 Detector Phase 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 14.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 Total Split (%) 20.0% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Recall Mode None Act Effct Green (s) 9.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.38 Control Delay 14.3 Queue Delay 0.0 Total Delay 14.3 LOS B Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Summary 2014 Build -out w/ Improvements Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3I612009 Lane Group LBU EBL EBT 'EBR ' WBL . WBT; WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL . SBT Lane Configurations i) tt r '� tT+ '� +T r +T Volume (vph) 22 144 796 146 95 1155 10 263 87 128 7 59 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 400 300 400 0 350 400 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.999 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.975 0.994 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1818 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 1740 1795 1639 0 1889 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.975 0.994 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1818 3540 1615 1769 3467 0 1740 1795 1639 0 1889 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 159 1 139 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 404 1673 1605 189 Travel Time (s) 9.2 38.0 31.3 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 24 157 865 159 103 1255 11 286 95 139 8 64 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 34% Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 181 865 159 103 1266 0 189 192 139 0 72 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment R NA Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Split custom Split Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group SBR Lan4onfigurations r Volume (vph) 97 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Grade (%) Storage Length (ft) 0 Storage Lanes 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt 0.850 Fit Protected Said. Flow (prot) 1615 Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Said. Flow (RTOR) 105 Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 105 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 Enter Blocked Intersection No Lane Alignment Right Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 Number of Detectors 1 Detector Template Right Leading Detector (ft) 20 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) Detector 2 Size(ft) Detector 2 Type Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Permitted Phases 2 2 Detector Phase 5 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 2 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 20.0 20.0 26.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 25.0 25.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 35.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 40.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (%) 25.3% 25.3% 40.4% 40.4% 20.2% 35.4% 0.0% 25.3% 25.3% 40.4% 14.1 % 14.1 % Maximum Green (s) 19.0 19.0 34.0 34.0 14.0 29.0 19.0 19.0 34.0 8.0 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None C-Max None None Act Effct Green (s) 14.7 41.6 41.6 12.8 36.9 15.4 15.4 41.6 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.42 0.42 0.13 0.37 0.16 0.16 0.42 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.58 0.21 0.45 0.98 0.70 0.69 0.18 0.47 Control Delay 51.6 26.2 4.5 46.0 53.6 53.3 52.2 4.6 54.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.6 26.2 4.5 46.0 53.6 53.3 52.2 4.6 54.2 LOS D C A D D D D A D Approach Delay 27.1 53.0 39.9 31.5 Approach LOS C D D C Intersection Summar Area Type. Other Cycle Length. 99 Actuated Cycle Length: 99 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.98 Intersection Signal Delay: 40.2 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Miiiw000 FiKe & L;uster ur �♦ -* 02 ` 01 04 `I 08 F 05 06 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 •r� Lane Group ' - SBR Permitted Phases 4 Detector Phase 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 14.0 Total Split (s) 14.0 Total Split (%) 14.1 % Maximum Green (s) 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Recall Mode None Act Effct Green (s) 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 v/c Ratio 0.46 Control Delay 15.9 Queue Delay 0.0 Total Delay 15.9 LOS B Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Summary 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Entrance & Custer Dr 3/4/2009 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT 'NEL NER Lane Configurations +T Volume (vph) 0 0 164 12 0 277 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.865 Flt Protected 0.955 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 1779 0 1611 Flt Permitted 0.955 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 1779 0 1611 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 262 392 189 Travel Time (s) 6.0 8.9 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 178 13 0 301 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 191 0 301 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 0 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 15 9 Sign Control Free Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Stowe Engineering, PLC Synchro 7 - Light: Report Page 6 • • • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pike & Purdue Dr. 3/6/2009 . • Movement EBL EBT WBU WBT , WBR SBL SBR • Lane Configurations tt A tt y • Volume (veh/h) 39 978 32 1473 6 0 11 Sign Control Free Free Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% • Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 42 1063 0 1601 7 0 12 • Pedestrians • Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) • Percent Blockage • Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None • Median storage veh) • Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.67 0.00 0.67 0.67 • vC, conflicting volume 1608 0 2221 804 • vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 935 0 1844 0 • tC, single (s) 4.1 0.0 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 0.0 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 92 0 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 499 0 42 735 Direction; Lane # EBA EB 2 . EB 3 WB 1 WB 2 . . WB 3 SB 1 • Volume Total 42 532 532 1067 540 0 12 • Volume Left 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 7 0 12 • cSH 499 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 735 • Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.31 0.31 0.63 0.32 0.00 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 • Control Delay (s) 12.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 • Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 10.0 • Approach LOS A Intersection Summary • Average Delay 0.2 • Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 • • • • • • • 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report • Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 • • • • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pike & Ryco Ln. 3/4/2009 • Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR • Lane Configurations tT+ tt y Volume (veh/h) 978 11 2 1473 5 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1063 12 2 1601 5 1 • Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) • Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None • Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.72 • vC, conflicting volume 1075 1874 538 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol • vCu, unblocked vol 1075 1427 538 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) • IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 94 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 656 92 493 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3. . NB 1 • Volume Total 709 366 2 801 801 7 Volume Left 0 0 2 0 0 5 Volume Right 0 12 0 0 0 1 cSH 1700 1700 656 1700 1700 106 Volume to Capacity 0.42 0.22 0.00 0.47 0.47 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 5 • Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.5 0.0 0.0 41.2 • Lane LOS B E Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 41.2 • Approach LOS E Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 14: Millwood Pike & Entrance 3/6/2009 Movement EBL EBT W 4-1 \10. 4/ INRR QRI '" , .4RR Lane Configurations tt tt r r Volume (vehlh) 0 978 1473 90 0 100 Sign Control Free Free Yield Grade -2% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1063 1601 98 0 109 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 404 pX, platoon unblocked 0.65 0.65 0.65 vC, conflicting volume 1601 2133 801 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 854 1669 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 85 cM capacity (veh/h) 509 57 707 Direction, Lane # EB 1:. . EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3" SB 1 Volume Total 532 532 801 801 98 109 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 98 109 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 707 Volume to Capacity 0.31 0.31 0.47 0.47 0.06 0.15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 11.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary. Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2020 - Design Year Conditions PM Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Millwood Pike & Purdue Dr. 3l6/2009 Movement EBL EBT WBU WBT WBR ' . SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt A tt Volume (vehlh) 25 1218 25 1340 6 0 18 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 1324 0 1457 7 0 20 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 980 pX, platoon unblocked 0.72 0.00 0.72 0.72 vC, conflicting volume 1463 0 2176 732 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 865 0 1855 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 0.0 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 0.0 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 95 0 100 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 566 0 46 785 Direction, Lane 1 EB 2 EB 3 W61 WB 2 WB 3' SB 1 Volume Total 27 662 662 971 492 0 20 Volume Left 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 7 0 20 cSH 566 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 785 Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.39 0.39 0.57 0.29 0.00 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 Control Delay (s) 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 9.7 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 • HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Millwood Pike & Ryco Ln. 3/4/2009 • Movement EBT' EBR WBL . WBT ' NBL NBR . Lane Configurations tT31 '� tt 'rjr' Volume (veh/h) 1218 11 0 1340 1 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop • Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1324 12 0 1457 1 0 • Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) • Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None • Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 1175 pX, platoon unblocked 0.75 • vC, conflicting volume 1336 2058 668 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol • vCu, unblocked vol 1336 1747 668 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) • IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) 100 523 98 59 100 406 Direction, Lane # EB I,*' EB 2. WB 1' WB:2 WB 3 NB 1 .: • Volume Total 883 453 0 728 728 1 • Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 1 Volume Right 0 12 0 0 0 0 • cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 59 • Volume to Capacity 0.52 0.27 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.02 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.9 • Lane LOS F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 66.9 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary . Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 14: Millwood Pike & Entrance 3/6/2009 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR' SBL SBR Lane Configurations tt tt r Volume (veh/h) 0 1218 1340 58 0 65 Sign Control Free Free Yield Grade -2% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1324 1457 63 0 71 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 404 pX, platoon unblocked 0.64 0.64 0.64 vC, conflicting volume 1457 2118 728 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 604 1631 0 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6,9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 625 59 698 Direction, Lane # EB 1' EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 WB 3 SIB 1. Volume Total 662 662 728 728 63 71 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 63 71 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 698 Volume to Capacity 0.39 0.39 0.43 0.43 0.04 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 8 Control Delay (s) 0,0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0.0 10.7 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.7 Approach LOS B fnlersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47,7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Entrance & Custer Dr 3/412009 Lane Group' EBT EBR: WBL WBT NEL NER . . Lane Configurations • Volume (vph) 0 0 155 9 0 187 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 • Frt 0.865 Flt Protected 0.955 • Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 1779 0 1611 • Flt Permitted 0.955 Said. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 1779 0 1611 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 262 392 189 Travel Time (s) 6.0 8.9 4.3 • Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 • Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 168 10 0 203 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 178 0 203 • Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 0 0 0 • Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 15 9 Sign Control Free Free Free Intersection Summary • Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 14.9% ICU Level of Service A • Analysis Period (min) 15 • 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 316/2009 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL . WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR : : SBL' SBT Lane Configurations aZi tt r '� fiT+ '� +T Volume (vph) 17 132 1011 262 112 1192 21 214 42 181 16 48 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -2% 2% -5% 0% Storage Length (ft) 400 300 300 0 350 400 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.997 0.850 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.967 0.988 Said. Flow (prot) 0 1819 3540 1615 1769 3461 0 1740 1777 1639 0 1877 Fit Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.967 0.988 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1819 3540 1615 1769 3461 0 1740 1777 1639 0 1877 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 285 2 197 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 35 30 Link Distance (ft) 404 1673 1605 189 Travel Time (s) 9.2 38.0 31.3 4.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 1 % 1 % 3% 0% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 18 143 1099 285 122 1296 23 233 46 197 17 52 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 41% Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 161 1099 285 122 1319 0 137 142 197 0 69 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment R NA Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 Detector Template Left Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 20 6 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94 Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6 Detector 2 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot Prot Perm Prot Split Perm Split Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group SBR Lan4onfigurations r Volume (vph) 91 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Grade (%) Storage Length (ft) 0 Storage Lanes 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frt 0.850 Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1615 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1615 Right Turn on Red Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 99 Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 99 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 99 Enter Blocked Intersection No Lane Alignment Right Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 9 Number of Detectors 1 Detector Template Right Leading Detector (ft) 20 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 Detector 2 Position(ft) Detector 2 Size(ft) Detector 2 Type Detector 2 Channel Detector 2 Extend (s) Turn Type Perm Protected Phases 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light: Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Permitted Phases 2 8 Detector Phase 5 5 2 2 1 6 8 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 15.0 26.0 26.0 15.0 26.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 35.0 35.0 20.0 35.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 14.0 14.0 Total Split (%) 22.5% 22.5% 39.3% 39.3% 22.5% 39.3% 0.0% 22.5% 22.5% 22.5% 15.7% 15.7% Maximum Green (s) 14.0 14.0 29.0 29.0 14.0 29.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 8.0 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Act Effct Green (s) 12.1 34.1 34.1 14.0 36.0 11.7 11.7 11.7 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.38 0.38 0.16 0.40 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.81 0.36 0.44 0.94 0.60 0.60 0.51 0.41 Control Delay 48.9 32.7 4.3 39.6 43.2 47.1 47.2 10.2 46.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 48.9 32.7 4.3 39.6 43.2 47.1 47.2 10.2 46.1 LOS D C A D D D D B D Approach Delay 29.1 42.9 31.9 27.4 Approach LOS C D C C Int0secfion Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 89 Actuated Cycle Length: 89 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.94 Intersection Signal Delay: 34.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 and Phases: 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 2020 Design Year Conditions Saturday Peak Hour Synchro 7 - Light. Report Stowe Engineering, PLC Page 3 � 0 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Millwood Pike & Custer Dr 3/6/2009 Lane Group SBR i Permitted Phases 4 Detector Phase 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 14.0 Total Split (s) 14.0 Total Split (%) 15.7% Maximum Green (s) 8.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Recall Mode None Act Effct Green (s) 8.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.42 Control Delay 14.3 Queue Delay 0.0 Total Delay 14.3 LOS B Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Summary 2020 Desic Stowe Engi Lle • • • • Appendix D • • 0 Pre -Scope of Work Meeting Form • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PRE -SCOPE OF WORK MEETING FORM Information on the Project Traffic Impact Analysis Base Assumptions The applicant is responsible for entering the relevant information and submitting the form to VDOT and the locality no less than three (3) business days prior to the meeting. If a form is not received by this deadline, the scope of work meeting may be postponed. Contact Information Consultant Name: Stowe Engineering, PLC Tele: 540.336.0656 E-mail: timstoNNie cr stoNN,ecompanies.com Developer/Owner Name: DM.I Holdings Tele: E-mail: Project Information Project Name: Winchester Nleaddows Locality/County: Frederick Project Location: (Attach regional and site Millwood Plc and Custcr Dr specific location maps Submission Type Comp Plan ❑ Rezoning 0 Site Plan ❑ Subd Plat ❑ Project Description: (Including details on the land use, acreage, phasing, access 20,340 SF commercial development location, etc. Attach additional sheet if necessary) Proposed Use(s): (Check all that apply; attach Residential ❑ Commercial 0 Mixed Use ❑ Other ❑ additional pages as necessary)_ Residential Uses(s) Number of Units: ITE LU Code(s): Other Use(s) ITE LU Code(s): Commercial Use(s) ITE LU Code(s): 310 - 60 rooms 853 - 8 fuel Independent Variable(s): positions Square Ft or Other Variable: Total Peak Hour Trip Less than 100 El100 — 499 [Z 500 — 999 El1,000 or more ❑ � Projection: It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Traffic Impact Analysis Assumptions Study Period Existing Year: 2009 Build -out Year: 2014 Design Year: 2020 • North: Custer Dr South: Millwood 11k Study Area Boundaries _ East: Purdue Dr West: Custer Dr • (Attach map) External Factors That Could Affect Project • (Planned road improvements, alone • other nearby developments) Consistency With • Comprehensive Plan yes (Land use, transportation plan) i Available Traffic Data VDOT count data • (Historical, forecasts) Road Name: Mill\vood - 30°/0E, Road Name: . Trip Distribution 55%W Road Name: Custer - 15%N Road Name: • (Attach sketch) Peak Period for Study ❑ AM ® PM SAT Annual Vehicle Trip • 2 (check all that apply) _ Growth Rate: Peak Hour of the Generator PM 1.Millwood and Custcr 6. • Study Intersections 2.M111wood and Piu-due 7. 3.Mill wood and site entrance 8. and/or Road Segments (Attach additional sheets as necessary) 4.Custer and site entrance 9. 5. 10. • Trip Adjustment Factors Internal allowance: ❑ Yes © No Pass -by allowance: ❑ Yes No Reduction: % trips Reduction: 40% trips Software Methodology © Synchro ❑ HCS (v.2000/+) ❑ aaSIDRA ❑ CORSIM ❑ Other a Traffic Signal Proposed or Affected Millwood and Custer affected • (Analysis software to be used, • progression speed, cycle length) • It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. Improvement(s) Assumed or to be right -in right -out onto Millwood Considered Background Traffic Studies Considered Gov. Hill M Master Development Plan (MDP) ❑ Generalized Development Plan (GDP) Plan Submission • ❑ Preliminary/Sketch Plan ❑ Other Plan type (Final Site, Subd. Plan) Additional Issues to be © Queuing analysis ❑ Actuation/Coordination ❑ Weaving analysis Addressed ❑ Merge analysis M Bike/Ped Accommodations M Intersection(s) ❑ TDM Measures ❑ Other NOTES on ASSUMPTIONS: SIGNED: DATE: Applicant or Consultant • PRINT NAME: Applicant or Consultant • It is important for the applicant to provide sufficient information to county and VDOT staff so that questions regarding geographic scope, alternate methodology, or other issues can be answered at the scoping meeting. (&RICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 October 15, 2009 Mr. John Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creels Grade, Ste. 120 Winchester, VA 22601 RL: RLi ZONING 405-09, DMJ HOLDINGS, LLC PINS: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-1<:; 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 AND 64A-4-20 Dear John: This letter serves to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their meeting of October 14, 2009. The above -referenced application was approved to rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East and Custer Avenue (Route 781), in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The proffer statement, dated March 24, 2009, with final revision date of July 1, 2009, that was approved as a part of this rezoning application is unique to the above referenced property and is binding regardless of ownership. Enclosed is a copy of the adopted proffer statement for your records. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the approval of this rezoning application. Sincerely, Michael T. Ruddy Deputy Planning Director MTR/bad Attachment cc: Gene Fisher, Shawnee Magisterial District Supervisor Lawrence Ambrogi and H. Paige Manuel, Shawnee Magisterial District Commissioners Jane Anderson, Real Estate Commissioner of Revenue VA 22602 DMJ Holdings, LLC, 345 Phelpsmore Lane, Winchester, Winchester Metals, 195 Ebert Rd., Winchester, VA 22603 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 0 REZONING APPLICATION 405-09 DMJ HOLDINGS, LLC Staff Report for the Board of Supervisors Prepared: October 5, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, MCP, Deputy Planning Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/16/09 Recommended approval Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 Bast, Millwood Pike, and Custer Avenue (Route 781). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 10/14/09 I30AIZD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan and the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated as they do not fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the transportation impacts of the request as they pertain to Route 50 and its intersection with Route 781, Custer Avenue. Additional corridor enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided, and flexibility in the proffer statement with regards to final entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided. The Applicant affirmed that ultimate flexibility would be provided to VDOT and Frederick County with regards to the final design of the entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. At their meeting of September 16, 2009, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, with proffers as presented, by a majority vote. 1`ollolt,illg the required public hearing, a decision regar(hllg this rezoning application by the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. The applicant should be prepared to adequately a&lress all concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors. • Rezoning 405-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them in slaking a decision oil this application. It may also be usefld to others Interested In this Zoning matter. Unresolved Issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/16/09 Recommended approval Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 Lase and Custer Avenue (Route 781). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBERS: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20 PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) PRESENT USE: Residential, Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential South: 132 (Business General) Use: Commercial Car Lot East: 132 (Business General) Use: Vacant West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential 0 0 Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: A proffer that leaves the door open for cooperation between the applicant, VDOT and the County to work out the best entrance and interconnectivity design at site plan phase would be appropriate. Based upon the recent rezoning at Old Charles Town and Route 11, the rezoning at Senseny Road and Greenwood Road and the importance of Route 50 to the County transportation system, it seems that the cash proffer for transportation does not offset the impacts of this rezoning. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements will need to be further relined to ensure connectivity to existing systems. Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a significant measurable impact on Routes 50 and 781. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property. VDOT has reviewed the transportation proffers offered in the DMJ Ioldings, LLC rezoning application dated July 1, 2009 addressing the transportation concerns associated with this request. It appears, after reviewing these proposed proffers for the improvements required for this rezoning, the improvements meet the threshold of acceptance for VDOT. There is one significanl concern which PDOT needs to point out: Resiclenls in subdivisions ii,hich are served b}, Route 781 ivho utilize 1his./acill1y, will be required to Pavel west on Route 50 and make a U-turn at the intersection ofRoule 50 and Ryco Lane. Ti•crffic then will h avel ii,est to the intersection of Rouse 50 and Route 781. If the Frederick County Board approves this rezoning, the potential for a negative ilnperct on II7e fI011 of 'eastbound Route 50 h affic at the intersection ofRyco Lane and Route 50 could be Sig17)fICC1171. Fire Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Woi-ks Department: 1. Refer to the discussion of the site suitability on page 2 of the impact analysis. Expand the discussion to include the potential existence of water wells and drainfields. These items should be accurately located on future site plans with references to appropriate abandonment procedures in accordance with the Virginia Department of I-Iealth guidelines. 2. Refer to the discussion of traffic on page 3 of the impact analysis. The discussion indicates that the site has frontage on both Custer- Avenue and Millwood Pike. In actuality, access to Custer Avenue is via the old Route 50 right- of-way. It is possible that the property could be obtained from the Virginia Department of Transportation for the proposed proffered access improvements from Custer Avenue. Department of Inspections: No comment. Sanitation Authority: There should be sufficient sewer capacity and sufficient water pressure and volurne to serve the rezoned parcels. Service Authority: No comments. Health Department: Health Department has no objection if public water and sewer are to be provided by the County. Department of Parks & Recreation: No comment. 0 0 Rezoning 405-09 — DMJ IIoldings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 4 Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the I-IRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the property nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Frederick County Public Schools: We offer no comments on this application. Winchester ReglOIlal Airport: The proposed rezoning request for DMJ IIoldings, LLC would be considered compatible with airport operations. It appears that this type of rezoning will not impact business operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. We do request review of the site plan once it is developed. Applicant should be made aware that prior to site work being performed, in accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2294, and the Federal Aviation Administration, the applicant must file a Notice of Proposed Construction, FAA Form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration for proposed structure(s) and a separate 7460-1 for construction equipment. Copies need to be forwarded to this office for record and review. Final comment on a site plan will be withheld pending the FAA's final determination with a copy forwarded to this office. This process could take upwards of 60 days and can be filed online. Frederick County Attorney: Please see allached e-inail doled May 26, 2009 and letter dated May 8, 2009, from Roclerick B. 111illiams, Counfjl Attorney. Planning Department: Please see allached Menlo elated Allay 26, 2009 and e-mail elated August 12, 2009 from Michael T. Rudely, AICP, Deputy Planning Director. Planning & Zoning: 1) Site I-Iistoi-y The original Frederick County Zoning map (USGS Winchester Quadrangle) depicts the zoning for the five parcels which comprise the proposed rezoning as R2 (Residential Limited) District. On February 14, 1990, the R-2 District zoning classification was modified to RP (Residential Performance), during the comprehensive amendment to the county's Zoning Ordinance. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan The Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the Community's guide for Illaking decisions regarding developIllent, preservation, public facilities and other key components of community life. The primary goal of this plan Is to protect and improve the living environment within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future physical development of Frederick County. [Comprehei7sil,e Policy Plcna, p. 1-1 J 0 Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 5 Land Use. The property is within the UDA and SWSA and is designated as an area of commercial land use by the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The property is located in the area covered by the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. The land use plan identifies, more specifically, a business and office commercial designation with a transition back into the surrounding residential land uses. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 50. The business corridor design standards in the Comprehensive Plan are relevant to this application. The standards call for landscaping along the major roadways and the screening of adjoining uses 7'ransL)ortal ion This application must address the transportation components of the County's Comprehensive Plan, including the Eastern Road Plan. The Eastern Road Plan section of the Comprehensive Plan designates Route 50 as an improved minor arterial roadway. Access on arterial roadways must be carefully managed to protect safety and capacity. Route 50 is identified as an urban six - lane divided facility in this location. In 2007, the Governors Hill project was approved by Frederick County. This project includes a variety of transportation proffers which addresses improvements to the intersection of Route 50 and Prince Frederick Drive/Custer Avenue. The timing of these improvements in connection with the development of this property should be a consideration. Access management of Route 50 is a significant consideration. Any entrance onto Route 50 should be carefully designed to avoid additional degradation and conflicts of the areas traffic conditions. Site Access rind desig�a. Site Access is proposed to be provided from two locations. Primary access to the site is via Route 50 and a secondary access point is proposed to be provided from Route 781 (Custer Avenue) via a modified commercial entrance onto Route 781 generally using the existing right of way across the properties frontage. The Route 50 entrance would be in the form of a right in right out only entrance, the Route 781 entrance would be right in only. As noted above access to Route 50 must be carefillly managed to protect the safety and capacity of Route 50. The ability for staff and VDOT to influence the design of entrances to this location at site plan will be an important consideration for this rezoning. 0 • Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 6 3) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any environmental features that would either constrain or preclude site development. In particular, there are no identified areas of steep slopes, mature woodlands, floodplain or wetlands on the parcels which are identified in this application. A more thorough evaluation of the existing mature trees on the properties perimeter should be completed to determine if any can be incorporated into the design of the project. A proffer has been provided which seeks to address this. Such an approach is warranted as any building located to the rear of the site may sit at an elevation higher than the surrounding residential properties. The screening should be evaluated to ensure the adjacent residential properties are adequately protected. 4) Potential Impacts A. Ti•anspoi•tation The TIA indicates that adequate levels of service should be able to be maintained. The applicant still needs to address VDOT's comment regarding U-turns on Route 50. Placement of bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Route 50 and connections to existing bicycle and pedestrian systems in the neighboring community will be important for this rezoning. Great care will need to be taken in design and implementation of entrances to this site. It would be appropriate for the proffers to ensure that Frederick County and VDOT will have adequate influence to make sure this happens. B. Design Standards The application does not provide for the addition of an enhanced landscaping element along the properties frontage with Route 50. This application could provide for additional street tree planting along the properties' road frontages. The application does include minimal architectural language, written in an attempt to address the appearance of the buildings. However, this is the limit of the design elements and may not fully address the corridor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Given the adjacent residentially zoned properties to the north and west of this site, it may be beneficial to tailor an approach to the buffer and screening of these properties in addition to those requirements that would be required by ordinance. This may need to be in addition to the existing tree preservation proffer. C. Community Facilities The development of this site will have an impact on community facilities and services. However, it is recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application's effort to address the impacts to community facilities is limited to a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 7 5) Proffer Statement — Dated March 24, 2009 with latest revision July 1, 2009 A) Generalized Development Plan The Applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the proposed commercial development; the location and form of the site access, the approximate location of inter parcel access easements, and construction improvements to Route 50 and 781 . B) Land Use The Applicant has not proffered any limitation on the scope or square footage of the development that could occur on this site. Alternately, the proffer proposes to limit any future use(s) to those that will not generate in excess of 200 vehicle trips per hour during any hour. It should be clarified that this trip count is cumulative Several land uses have been prohibited by the Applicant. These include; Car washes, Fast Food Restaurants with Drive through service windows, Automotive Dealers with outdoor display areas and Gasoline Service Stations, Model Home Sales Offices, Amusement and Recreational Services operated outdoors, Self Service Storage Facilities, and Adult Retail. C) Site Design New buildings arc proffered to be constructed using compatible building architectural style and materials and have limited the facades of the building to certain materials. Staff note: A specific design, iuclrrrliug building orientation, has not been pi•ovirlerl. The building height has been limited to 35' as defined by the County's Zoning Ordinance. This proffer will ensure that the height of any building does not extend above the height limitations of the District, including any exceptions to the limitations for uses such as hotels. A parcel lighting proffer has been included which limits pole mounted and wall mounted luminaries from exceeding a height of 18'. Additional lighting expectations have been offered. It should be recognized that Frederick County has recently adopted new lighting standards which will guide the lumination of the site. The Applicant has proffered to identify and preserve existing vegetation within the 25' inactive buffer which can be preserved and incorporated into the screening requirements currently in place in Frederick County. It would be anticipated that this would serve to maintain a better buffer between the commercial activities and the residences. Rezoning 405-09 — DM.I I-Ioldings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 8 D) Transportation The Applicant has proffered frontage improvements on Route 781, Custer Avenue, and Route 50, Millwood Pike, including construction generally consistent with that identified on the Generali-r_ed Development Plan and required by VDOT. The Proffers creed to address the /teed for Frederick County and VDOT to have final approval over- design of entrances in the site planning process. A restricted right -in right -out commercial entrance is proffered on Route 50. Access from Custer Avenue has been provided by a modified right in entrance that utilizes the existing right of way which runs in front of the properties. Additional median separation is also provided along Custer Avenue as identified on the Generalized Development Plan to facilitate traffic flow in this location. Additional storage capacity has been proffered to be provided in the existing left turn lane on eastbound Route 50. The tiering of this project should be evaluated against the tiering of the installation of improvements to the Custer Avenue intersection lvith Route 50, specifically, the improvements proffered by the Governors Hill project ►t,hich would ierprove the intersection to an acceptable level of service. The Applicant has proffered to provide $5,000.00 for future transportation improvements within the Route 781 and Route 50 right-of-ways. Asnotedearlie�ithe cash proffers appear inadequate when considering other recent B2 rezoiiings and the ietportance of Route 50 to the Frederick Coreity transportation system. Inter parcel circulation and access has been proffered from all points of right of way ingress and egress to and from the site to the parcels which share a common boundary line to the east and west. A sidewalk has been proffered aimed at linking the project to the adjacent neighborhood of Pembridge I-Ieights and a bicycle facility has been proffered on the Route 50 frontage. Bicycle and pedestrian accoetmodations Need to be provided along Route 50 in keeping ivith adopted plaiis3aiid coiiiiectioiis need to be /male to the existingsidewalk system in the neighboring community (it would be e I)ected that a connection be made to the existina sidewalk at the entrance to the Raven Wing neighborhood. r) Community Facilities The Applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount $2,000.00 for impacts to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. 9 0 Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 9 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Lastcrn Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan and the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated as they do not fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the transportation impacts of the request as they pertain to Route 50 and its intersection with Route 781, Custer Avenue. Additional corridor enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided, and flexibility in the proffer statement with regards to final entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY & ACTION OF THE 9/16/09 MEETING: The applicant reported spending a considerable amount with VDOT, the Planning Department, and the homeowners associations of Ravenwing and Pembridge Heights in identifying the impacts and the applicant believed they had succeeded in addressing those concerns through their proffers. The applicant believed the GDP, which identified the general configuration and location of the site access, the approximate location of inter -parcel access easements, and the construction improvements to Custer Avenue (Rt. 781) and Millwood Pike (Rt. 50), worked conceptually; however, lie said the transportation design needed to be engineered and sent through the site plan stage for review by both VDOT and the County. The applicant proceeded to describe the proposed transportation improvements. The Deputy Director -Transportation reported that the majority of issues had been worked out with the applicant; however, the County and VDOT wanted to be assured they could exert an adequate amount of influence at the site planning stage to be confident the entrances were properly designed and constructed. Two adjoining property owners spoke during the public comment portion of the hearing. The first citizen, speaking on behalf of himself and his neighbors, expressed his preference for a lower height restriction than the 35-foot offered, so the neighbors could enjoy their backyards without a hotel overlooking their properties; they did not want a 24-hour business or convenience store established because it would disrupt the neighborhood; they had safely concerns about the "U-turn" going back west on Route 50 and the blind spot created by vehicles turning into the Blue Fox. The other citizen talked about the high volume of traffic that has always been on Route 50 and the lack of traffic control over the years. She said vehicles frequently stack up at the traffic signal across from the Nissan Dealership and sometimes vehicles sit through three cycles of lights. She commented that the increased traffic volume coming out at Pembrooke was "cut -through" traffic from Senseny Road. She questioned the practicality of placing bicycle and pedestrian trails because of the steep slopes. Members of the Planning Commission expressed their concerns that the applicant's monetary proffer for transportation improvements appeared inadequate when considering other recently rezoned B2 parcels and the importance of Route 50 to the County's transportation system; they also believed the applicant's monetary contribution towards emergency services fell short of addressing future Impacts. Rezoning 405-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC October 5, 2009 Page 10 Other Conunissioners supported the approval of the rezoning because it conformed to the Comprehensive Policy Plan and the Eastern Frederick County Land Use Plan. They believed the applicant had done as good a job as possible on a very challenging site. In addition, the applicant had worked Nvith the neighborhood and proffered out intense commercial uses, such as drive -through fast food restaurants, automotive dealers, gasoline service stations, and convenience stores; and, structure heights were limited to 35 feet instead of 60 feet. Commission members thought the improvements proposed by the applicant would acid to the safety of the entrance. By a majority vote, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed rezoning with proffers as presented. "rhe majority vote was as follows: YES (TO APPROVE): Mohn, Triplett, Madagan, Thomas, Wihnot, Ruckman, Manuel, Ambrogi NO: Unger (Note: Commissioner Crosen, Oates, and Kriz were absent from the meeting.) _ '��Py�A�nv1�d -- ,. Tom;.-;s��7 -. - $ Tr �'r.+�'.'v:,.' -.,-•� !� J r 40 ' DMJ Holdings LLC REZ # 05 - 09 PIN: 64A - 4 - 16, 64A - 4 — 17, 64A - 4 - 18, 64A - A - 19, 64A — 4 - 20 RP to 112 C.URIUN-1, LAND USE Ca,c Plannct MRuddN Future RU7 Bypass Long Range Land Use Hgh ay Commercial Recreation REZ0509_DMJMOIdmgsLLC_082509 Rural Community Center Industrial Natural Resources 8 Re • • is — l rAan Un rl��pmcet lrca Residential �,e Mixed Use Industrial +Office .. Open Space 0+`r1\N\{ �� Mixed Use Age ResIncled 94 Urban Center �r InsleNional .yam Maed-Use -0.� Neighborhood Village ', Histonc \ DSA Business � Planned Unit Development Mixed Use Commercial X Office • st - as .st is • st st is is st • as siss ■ ••• .. • PEMONV6117-HEICAT) st st st a • ■ ar_ou6G1E PARK is - is • as •as F!AVEN WIN(A is st st is as ■ as ■ a . ■ • as as • •, • isisis • - / ■ ■ ` • st • a a - • . ■ 'as st ■ N MILLER H6164S is .a is i^isst as is AC-C FREDERIGK OFFICE PAR7 r. r ik •5t 1. ts^. CO S�F GARPER5 VALLEY TOWN G6NTBR v I'll OO D.M.1 Holdings LLC RP to B2 REZ # 05 — 09 cot PIN: 64A - 4 - 16, 64A - 4 - 17, 64A - 4 - 18, (CURRENT ZONING 64A-A- 19, 64A-4- 20 Casc Planner Mudd Future Rt77 Bypass Zoning M2(lndavri.l. Gc—al District) OREZ0509_DMJHo0ngsLLC_082509 8I IR..in — ♦c,R■I. b..l DM-11 - MHI (MR.1c Hnme 0--its Dimckil •�• • w I 1 rh•n Ilr. nopmem Area HS IHuu cars.. General Monti)• MS (Mcdkal ti.pl.�n District) sN s440 83 Ill-- li da•lrial Tranutwn Disin") 440 Rs (Residen Jal Planned Commanih District) — EM (Eunetne Maaafactariat District) • RS IReude■tial RecrealH.ul (omma■ih District) — HE (Hisl rr Edac•tioa Districl) RA (Racal Area Nitric l) — MI (ladasiri•l. Light District) RP (Resideatial Perinrm•ace District) PEMRRinr_ 1 I � I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I M .Sb 60.L0 1>1 '• ' I, M r a. 'o, n �M O N 1 'r I / I / I / 1 / / / PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. PROJECT: NA�� CNA 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 LOT CONSOLIDATION EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: P-L 0812002 Winchester, Virginia 22601 DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. SCALE: DATE: Telephone (540)662-5792 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA i'=100.0' 8/25/09 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 SHEET: ENGINEERS Email office0painterlewis.com EXHIBIT 6 t • REZONING APPLICATION FORIM FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA b be completed by Planning Staff- ning Amendment Nu Aber Hearing Date GI / Mq I Pee Amount Paid $ Date Received o BOS Hearing Date The folloi-idng information Shall be provided by the applicant: All parcel identification numbers, deed book and page numbers may be obtained from the Office of the Commissioner of Revenue, Real Estate Division, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester. 1. Applicant: Name: DW kd .Ing5 , L LC Telephone: G, L, I L)W JI ,, Address: 345 Phe1 e n-) oy �.( / 1"Ie I \ti i nc-. 1F'_strf VIA 3,'� (:OQ 2. Property Owner (if different than above) Name: W 111E hestr Me ds Address: H 5 C btr+ Rood 3. Contact person if other than above Telephone: (J)�-'7 - 906 0 Nan1c: ���hn l��'l e� Telephone: � U 7C� Painter- LcLUf ft-c. d. Cliceldist: Check the following items that have been included with this application. Location map Agency Comments Plat Pees Deed to property Impact Analysis Statement Verification of taxes paid Proffer Statement 10 • E 0 • S. TIIe Code of Virginia allows us to request full disclosure of ownership in relation to rezoning applications. Please list below all owners or parties in interest of the land to be rezoned: 6. A) Current Use of the Property: Frs l clen fi cd / V oc o of — FP B) Proposed Use of the Property: 7. Adjoining Property: PQ - Glb-T�rc:d PUbihess PARCEL ID NUMBER USE ZONING S. Location: The property is located at (give exact location based on nearest road and distance from nearest intersection, using road nalnes and route numbers): Parceis are I ocuted (� Nah wesl. Corner L,( R tie SO ayyd Cuss r Ave,n u e . 11 0 • • • 9. The following information should be provided according to the type of rezoning proposed : Single Family homes: Non -Residential Lots: Office: Retail: Restaurant: 10. Signature: Number of Units Proposed Townhome: Nlobilc Home: Multi -Family: Hotel Rooms: Sic care Footage of Proposed Uses _ Service Station _ Manufacturing: _ Warehouse: Other: C'nmmer-ucd — T 6 0. I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application and petition the Frederick County Board of Supervisors to amend the zoning ordinance and to change the zoning map of Frederick County, Virginia. I (we) authorize Frederick County officials to enter the property for site inspection purposes. I (we) understand that the sign issued when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven clays prior to the Planning Commission public hearing and the Board of Supervisors' public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road right-of-way until the hearing. I (we) hereby certify that this application and its accompanying materials are true and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. ✓ Owner(s): 4� � � Gl 1cf5 L.l_.��- W;n�l�ter Nletal;� Irk 12 Date: 7 /6 0 Date: Date: -7 1 116116) cj Date: —/ /(a C t • -- G1GG /�/ G�IGGGG _�- CITY OF WINCHESTER -Z - fi 41 W • s Ci qky 0 0�G Z) 0 0 > LL_ Z/ FUTURE < F E CTIOt4 ZE) CONN CTION-� it SPRING ROAD DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1"=2000' DRAWN BY: P - L. DATE: 2-12-09 JOB #0812002 DRAWN BY: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA LOCATION MAP PEMBRIDGE U I 1 r� 1 I PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone (540)662-5792 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 ENGINEERS Email officempainterlewis.com PROJECT: LOT CONSOLIDATION DMJ HOLDINGS, FREDERICK COUNTY, EXHIBIT L.L.C. %ARGINIA NARVEY: DNA DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: P—L 0812002 SCALE: DATE: 1"=100.0' 8/25/09 SHEET: EXHIBIT 6 1�9O 4. r � Senseny ROod W; 1 MILE RADIUS FROM �CENTER OF SITE /I i-o 29** HISTORICAL PRCOTY KEY 8 — UNIDENTIFIED 199 — BARR HOUSE (J 417 — JOHN CARPER HOUSE** 418 — HOUSE, ROUTE 657 ® 1213 J 423 — BRAITHWAITE HOUSE J w 424 — GARBER FARM z 430 — ROSENBERGER FARM** V o 462 — PINGLEY HOUSE 0 W 0 463 — STORE, RT 522 ® OLD RT 645 z (� (L U 464 — BEAVER HOUSE 465 — GOTHOIC REVIVAL HOUSE, M ¢ BEAVER PROPERTY Q Y 1129 — CARPER—WYNN HOUSE** 0 00 1176 — HEISHLAND HOUSE _ 0 w/_ w O �W �Ld w C)= _� NOTE: ** INDICATES A POTENTIALLY o SIGNIFICANT SITE AS DENOTED BY THE RURAL LANDMARKS ■ SURVEY REPORT OF FREDERICK COUNTY ■ O N �(D �D 0 0-)� U) N L N N CD •� W CD^ U � 'O Q J �Ln@ L C E° L (n °' -� _ a u Wo U U — Zw 00 Q a. 0C/') z J � W 0 SURVEY: C.I.: NA NONE DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: 1200 0 1200 JLF 0812002 SCALE: DATE: 1"=1200' 03/05/09 Scale 1" = 1200 ft SHEET: EXHIBIT 5 REZONING APPLICATION 805-09 DMJ HOLDINGS, LLC Staff Report foi• the Planning Commission Prepared: September 1, 2009 Staff Contact: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Planning Director Reviewed Action Planning Commission: 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East, Millwood Pike, and Custer Avenue (Route 781). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & STAFF CONCLUSION FOR THE 09/I6/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern I'rcclerick County Long Range Land Use Plan and the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. However, elements Of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated as they do not fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In partiCLllar, the transportation impacts of the regUest as they pertain to ROLIte 50 and its Intersection with ROLIte 781, CLlstei- AvelILIC. Additional coi-i-idOi- eilllallceilleilt Clelllents such as landscaping should be provided, and flexibility in the proffer statement with regards to final entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be provided. 1`ollowing the reatuared public hearau�7, a recommendation /'egai-ding this /'ezoning application to the Board of Supei'VJSoi-s would be appropriate The applicant should be prepared to adequatell, address all concerns raised by the Planning Commission. • Rezoning 905-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 2 This report is prepared by the Frederick County Plalririirg Staff to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist them it making a decision on this application. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning mattes% Unresolved issues concerning this application are noted by staff where relevant throughout this staff report. Reviewed Action Planning COmmissiOn: 09/16/09 Pending Board of Supervisors: 10/14/09 Pending PROPOSAL: To rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. LOCATION: The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 Ease and Custer Avenue (Route 781). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY Ill NUMBERS: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64n-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20 PROPERTY ZONING: RP (Residential Performance) PRESENT USE: Residential, Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential South: B2 (Business General) Use: Commercial Car Lot East: B2 (Business General) Use: Vacant West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential • Rezoning 405-09 — DM.i Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 3 REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Frederick County Transportation: A proffer that leaves the door open for cooperation between the applicant, VDOT and the County to work out the best entrance and interconncctivity design at site plan phase would be appropriate. Based upon the recent rezoning at Old Charles Town and Route 11, the rezoning at Senseny Road and Greenwood Road and the importance of Route 50 to the County transportation system, it seems that the cash proffer for transportation does not offset the impacts of this rezoning. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements will need to be further refined to ensure connectivity to existing systems. Virginia Dept. of Transportation: The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a Sigmlicant pleasurable impact on Routes 50 and 781 . These routes are the VDOT roadways Nvhich have been considered as the access to the property. VDO'f has reviewed the transportation proffers offered in the DMJ Holdings, LLC rezoning application dated July 1, 2009 addressing the transportation concerns associated with this request. It appears, after reviewing these proposed proffers for the improvements required for this rezoning, the improvements meet the threshold of acceptance for VDOT. There is one signViicant concern iMich VD07'neecls to point out: Resiclents in subdivisions ii,hich are served by Route 781 li�ho ittilize this.fticility, 1i,ill be reyuimcl to h•avel west on Rouse 50 and make a U-tarn at the intersection oJ'Rortle SO and Ryco Lane. Traffic then it ill travel iiies•t to the intersection of Route 50 and Route 781. If the Freclerick County Board approves this rezoning, the potential for (i negative impact on the floiv of eastbouncl Route SO Iraffrc al the intersection of lZyco Lane and Route 50 could be significant. Fh-e Marshal: Plan approval recommended. Public Works Department: I. Refer to the CliSCIISSI011 Of the site suitability on page 2 of the impact analysis. Expand the discussion to include the potential existence of water wells and drainfields. These items should be accuratel)' located oil future site plans with references t0 appropriate abandonment procedures in accordance With the Virginia Department Of l-Icalth guidelines. 2. Refer t0 the discussion of traffic on page 3 of the impact anal)'sis. The Ciscussion indicates that the site has frontage On both Custer Avenue and Millwood Pike. In actuality, access to Custer Avenue is via the old Route 50 right- of-way. It is possible that the property Could be obtained from the Virginia Department of Transportation for the proposed proffered access improvements from Custer Avenue. Department of Inspections: No comment. Sanitation Authority: There should be sufficient sewer capacity and sufficient water pressure and volume t0 serve the rezoned parcels. Service Authority: No comments. Health Department: I-Iealtli Department has no objection if public water anti sewer are to be provided by the County. Denai'tinent of Parks & Recreation: No comment, 9 0 Rezoning 905-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 4 Historic Resources Advisory Board: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application by the I-IRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are 110 significant historic structures located on the property nor arc there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study Of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Frederick County Public Schools: We Offer no comments On this application. Winchester Regional Airport: The proposed rezoning request for DMJ Holdings, LLC would be considered compatible with airport operations. It appeal's that this type Of 1czolling will not impact business operations at the Winchester Regional Airport. We do request review of the site plan once it is developed. Applicant should be made aware that prior to site work being performed, in accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2294, and the Federal Aviation Administration, the applicant must file a Notice Of Proposed Construction, FAA Dorm 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration for proposed structure(s) and a separate 7460-1 for construction Cglliplllellt. COpiCS need to be forwarded to this office for record and review. Final comment on a site plan will be withheld pending the FAA's final determination with a copy forwarded to this office. This process could take upwards o1' 60 days and can be filed online. Frederick County Attorney: Please see cillached e-mail cicrlecl Allay 26, 2009 and letter cicrtecl Nlay S, 2009, from Roderick B. Il'illiams, County Allorney. Planning Department: Please see attached Allemo dated Allay 26, 2009 and e-mail elated August 12, 2009 from Alichael T. Rudely, f1IC'P, Deputy Planning Direclor. P1:11111huy & Zonin{?: 1) Site History The original Frederick County L011ing map (USGS WillCI1CStCr QUadrangle) depicts the zoning for the five parcels which comprise the proposed rezoning as R2 (Residential Limited) District. On February 14, 1990, the R-2 District zoning classification was modified to RP (Residential Performance), during the comprehensive amendment to the COUnty'S Zoning Ordinance. 2) Comprehensive Policy Plan Tlie Frederick County Comprehensive Policy Plan is an official public document that serves as the COn1MUllity'S gL11dC for making decisions regarding development, preservation, public facilities and other key components Of ColllillLinity life. I he primary goal of this plan is to protect and improve the living envirolllllent within Frederick County. It is in essence a composition of policies used to plan for the future I)hysical development Of Frederick County. [Comprehensive Policy Plan, p. 1-11 Rezoning 805-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 5 Land Use. The property is Within the UDA and SWSA and Is designated as an area Of commercial land Use by the Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan. The property is located in the area covered by the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. The land use plan identifies, more specifically, a business and office commercial designation with a transition back into the surrounding residential land uses. The business corridor expectations of the Comprehensive Plan should be recognized. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance along Route 50. The business corridor design standards in the Comprehensive Plan are relevant to this application. The standards call for landscaping along the major roadways and the screening of adjoining uses Transportation This application must address the transportation components Of the County's Comprehensive Plan, including the Eastern Road Plan. The Eastern Road Plan section of the Comprehensive Plan designates Route 50 as an improved minor arterial roadway. Access on arterial roadways must be carefully managed t0 protect safety and capacity. ROLIte 50 is identified as an Urban six - lane divided facility in this location. In 2007, the Governers Hill project was approved by Frederick County. This project includes a variety of transportation proffers Which addresses improvements to the intersection Of Route 50 and Prince Frederick Drive/Custer Avenue. The timing Of these improvements In connection With the development of this property SIIOIIld be a consideration. Access management Of ROLIte 50 is a significant consideration. Any entrance Onto Route 50 should be carefully designed to avoid additional degradation and conflicts of the areas traffic conditions. Site Access and design. Site Access is proposed to be provided from two locations. Primary access to the site is via ROute 50 and a secondary access point is proposed t0 be provided from Route 781 (Custer Avenue) via a modified commercial entrance onto ROute 78 1 generally Using the existing right ofway across the properties frontage. The Route 50 entrance would be in the form Of a right in right out only entrance, the ROLItc 781 entrance would be right in only. As noted above access to Route 50 must be carefully managed to protect the safety and capacity of Route 50. The ability for staff and VDOT to influence the design Of entrances to this location at site plan will be an important consideration for this rezoning. • 0 Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 6 3) Site Suitability/Environment The site does not contain any environmental featUrCS that would either constrain or preclude site developIllent. Ill particular, there are no identified areas of steel) slopes, mature woodlands, floodplain or wetlands on the parcels which are identif iecl in this application. A more thorough evaluation of the existing mature trees on the properties perimeter should be completed to determine if any can be incorporatecl into the design of the project. A proffer has been provided which seeks to address this. SLICK all approach Is warranted as any building located to the rear of the site may sit at all elevation higher than the surrounding residential properties. The screening should be evaluated to ensure the adjacent residential properties are adequately protected. 4) Potential Impacts A. Transportation The TIA indicates that adequate levels of service should be able to be maintained. Tile applicant still needs to address VDO1 'S comment regarding U41-11.11S oil ROLIte 50. Placement of bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Route 50 and connections to existing bicycle and pedestrian systems 111 the neighboring community will be important for this rezoning. Great care will need to be taken in design and implementation of entrances to this site. It would be appropriate for the proffers to ensure that Frederick County and VDOT will have adequate influence to make sure this happens. B. Design Standards The application does not provide for the addition of an enhanced landscaping element along the properties frontage with Route 50. This application Could provide for additional street tree planting along the properties' road frontages. 1 hC application does 111CILICIC minimal architectural language, written in all attempt to address the appearance of the bUlldingS. However, this is the limit of the design elements and may not fully address the corriclor appearance goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Given the adjacent residentially zoned properties to the north and west of this site, it may be beneficial to tailor an approach to the buffer and screening of these properties in addition to those requirements that would be required by ordinance. This may need to be in addition to the existing tree preservation proffer. C. Community Facilities 'File development of this site will have an impact on Community facilities and services. However, it is recognized that commercial uses generally provide a positive impact on community facilities through the additional generation of tax revenue. This application's effort to address the impacts to C0111111Lllllty faculties IS limited to a $2,000.00 contribution to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes. • 0 Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 7 5) Proffer Statement — Dated March 24, 2009 with latest revision JLily 1, 2009 A) Generalized Development Plan The Applicant has proffered a Generalized Development Plan for the purpose of identifying the general configuration Of the proposed commercial development; the location and form of the site access, the approximate location of inter parcel access casements, and C011StruCti0i1 improvements t0 ROLIte 50 and 781. B) Land Use The Applicant has not proffered any limitation on the scope or square footage of the development that could occur on this site. Alternately, the proffer proposes to limit any future use(s) to those that will not generate in excess of' 200 vehicle trips per hour during any hour. It should be clarified that this trip count is cumulative Several land uses have been prohibited by the Applicant. These include; Car washes, Fast Food Restaurants with Drive through service winclows, Automotive Dealers with outdoor display areas and Gasoline Service Stations, Model Home Sales Offices, Amusement and Recreational Services operated outdoors, Self Service Storage Facilities, and Adult Retail. C) Site Design New buildings are proffered to be constructed using compatible building architectural style and materials and have limited the facades of the building to certain materials. Staff note: A specific design, including building oHentation, has not been provided. The building height has been limited to 35' as defined by the County's Zoning Ordinance. This proffer will ensure that the height of any building does not extend above the height limitations Of the District, including any exceptions to the limitations for uses such as hotels. A parcel lighting proffer has been ineluciccl which limits pole mounted and wall mounted luminaries from exceeding a height of 18'. Additional lighting expectations have been offered. It should be recognized that Frederick County has recently adopted new lighting standards which will guide the 1L1111ination of the site. Tlie Applicant leas proffcred to identify and preserve existing vegetation within the 25' inactive buffer which can be preservccl and incorporated into the screening requirements currently in place in Frederick County. It would be anticipated that this would serve to maintain a better buffer between tllc commercial activities and the residences. Rezoning #05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 8 D) Transportation The Applicant has proffered frontage improvements on Route 781, Custer Avenue, and Route 50, Millwood Pike, including construction generally consistent with that identified on the Generalized Development Plan and required by VDOT. The Proffers heed to address the need for Frederick County and VDOT to have flllal approval over design of entrances ill the site planning process. A restricted right -in right -out commercial entrance is proffered on Route 50. Access from Custer Avenue has been provided by a modified right in entrance that utilizes the existing right of way which runs in front of the properties. Additional median separation is also provided along Custer Avenue as identified on the Generalized Development Plan to facilitate traffic flow in this location. Additional storage capacity has been proffered to be provided in the existing left turn lane on eastbound Route 50. The timing of this project should be evaluated against the timing of the installation of iniln-ovements to the Custel•Avenue intel•section with Route 50, specifically, the improvements proffered by the Govei-nels Hill pl'oject which would improve the intersection to all acceptable level of service. The Applicant has proffered to provide $5,000.00 for future transportation improvements within the Route 781 and Route 50 right-of-ways. Asnotedearlierthe cash proffers appear inadequate when considering other recent B2 1-ezollillgs and the importance of Route 50 to the Frederick County transportation system. Inter parcel circulation and access has been proffered from all points of right of way ingress and egress to and from the site to the parcels which share a common boundary line to the east and west. A sidewalk has been proffered aimed at linking the project to the adjacent neighborhood of Pembridge Heights and a bicycle facility has been proffered on the Route 50 frontage. Bic})cle and pedestrian accommodations need 10 be ploovided along Route 50 ill keeping with adopted plans and connections need to be made to the exlstingsidewalk system ill the neighbol•ing community (it would be expected that a connection be made to the existing sidewalk at the entrance to the Raven Tying neighborhood). E) Community Facilities The Applicant has proffered a monetary contribution in the amount $2,000.00 for impacts to Frederick County for fire and rescue purposes. Rezoning 05-09 — DMJ Holdings, LLC September 1, 2009 Page 9 STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE 09/16/09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: In general, the B2 land use proposed conforms to the Eastern 1'redcrlck County Long Range Land Use Plan and the Route 50 Business Corridor Plan. However, elements of the rezoning application have been identified that should be carefully evaluated as they do not fully address specific components of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, the transportation impacts of the request as they pertain to Route 50 and its intersection with Route 781, Custer Avenue. Additional corridor enhancement elements such as landscaping should be provided, and flexibility in the proffer statement with regards to final entrance locations and bicycle and pedestrian accommoclations should be provided. following the required public hearing, a recommendation rekrarding this rezoning appllcatloll to the Board of Supen4sors would be appropriate. Tlie applicant should be prepared to adelt[lately address all concerns raised by the Manning Commission. it • 0 AMENDMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: September 16, 2009 - Recommended Approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: October 14, 2009 APPROVED ❑ DENIED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP REZONING #05-09 OF DMJ HOLDINGS, LLC WHEREAS, Rezoning #05-09 of DMJ Holdings LLC, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers dated March 24, 2009, last revised on July 1, 2009, for Commercial Use, was considered. The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East and Custer Avenue (Route 781), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4- 17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning on September 16, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this rezoning on October 14, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the approval of this rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Policy Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Chapter 165 of the Frederick County Code, Zoning, is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, for Commercial Use. The conditions voluntarily proffered in writing by the applicant and the property owner are attached. PDRE-S#40-09 w This ordinance shall be in effect on the date of adoption. Passed this 14th day of October, 2009 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Aye Gary W. Dove Gene E. Fisher Philip A. Lemieux PDRES#40-09 Gary A. Lofton Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye A COPY ATTEST Aye Absent Aye John R.' Riley, Jr. Frederick County Administrator n 0 i DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. ROUTE 50 & CUSTER AVENUE Proffer Statement Rezoning #: Property: 2.85 acres PARCEL ID's: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 Recorded Owner: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Applicant: Mr. Mark Phelps DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. 345 Phelpsmore Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 Project Name: Original Date of Proffers: Revision Date: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Route 50 & Custer Avenue Shawnee Magisterial District March 24, 2009 June 1, 2009 July 1, 2009 Prepared by: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 Tel.: (540) 662-5792 email: office@painteriewis.com Job Number: 0812002 PROFFER STATEM* PARCEL ID's: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 Pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, the undersigned applicant proffers that in the event that the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County shall approve Rezoning Application # for the rezoning of parcels TM#'s 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 from RP to B2, the use and development of the subject property shall be in strict conformance with the following conditions set forth in this proffer except to the extent that such conditions may be subsequently amended or revised by the applicant and such are approved by the Board of Supervisors in accordance with the Code of Virginia and the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. These proffers shall be binding on the owner and their legal successors or assigns. PROFFERS 1.) Generalized Development Plan The applicant agrees to proffer the Generalized Development Plan (GDP) dated 7/01/09, identified as "Generalized Development Plan DMJ Holdings, L.L.C." and which is attached to the proffer statement, for the purpose of identifying the general configuration of the proposed parcel after consolidation, the location and form of the site access, the approximate location of interparcel access easements, and construction improvements to Route 781, Custer Avenue and Route 50, Millwood Pike. Please refer to the attached drawing named "GDP". 2.) Limitation of Future Development A specific use for the parcel has not been identified. The type of use can have a significant traffic impact on local roads and the function of nearby intersections. The Traffic Impact Analysis, which is a part of the rezoning application, incorporated the assumption that the parcel could be developed with a 60 room hotel along with a convenience store with 8 fueling positions. This assumption resulted in relatively high vehicle trip counts when compared to other uses allowed in the B2 zone. These trip counts were used to evaluate potential impacts to the local road network. The applicant agrees to limit any future use(s) of the parcel to those uses which will not generate in excess of 200 vehicle trips per hour during any hour. The determination of trip numbers will be accomplished during the site plan review based on the proposed use(s). Trip counts will be determined using the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 71h Edition. 3.) Improvements to Route 50 and Route 781 The applicant will make the necessary road frontage improvements, as required by the Virginia Department of Transportation, to Route 50, Millwood Pike, and Route 781, Custer Avenue, in support of the proposed development. The improvements will be designed and submitted for approval to the Virginia Department of Transportation and Frederick County during the site plan review process. Construction of the improvements will be completed prior to the occupancy of any new building on the site. The improvements will include: - page 2 a PROFFER STATEMW • PARCEL Us: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 a) The design and construction of a right turn lane westbound on Route 50 with the appropriate length and taper ending in a right in/right out commercial entrance serving as the primary access to the site; b) The design and construction of a right turn lane southbound on Route 781 from a proposed right in only entrance to its intersection with Route 50; c) The design and construction of a raised median between travel lanes on Route 781 to prevent left turn movements into the right in only entrance described in "b" above; d) The design and construction of additional vehicle storage area in the existing left turn lane on eastbound Route 50; e) The design and construction of bicycle facilities along Route 50 in front of the site; f) The design and construction of pedestrian facilities linking Pembridge Avenue with proposed facilities in the Route 50 right of way. 4.) Inter -parcel Circulation and Access The applicant agrees to provide easements which will permit access through the site from all points of right of way ingress and egress to and from the site to the parcels which share a common boundary line to the east and west. The approximate locations of the access points are shown on the GDP. The easements will be defined during the site plan process and recorded by the applicant upon approval by Frederick County and prior to the issuance of the first building permit issued for the site. 5.) Monetary Contribution to Frederick County Service Organizations The applicant will donate or will cause to be paid to the Treasurer of Frederick County for Fire and Rescue purposes the sum of $2,000.00 for impacts to fire and rescue services. This sum will be paid upon the receipt of the first building permit issued for the site, subsequent to the approval of this rezoning. 6.) Monetary Contributions The applicant agrees to provide $5,000.00, for future transportation improvements within the Route 781 and Route 50 rights -of -way. This sum will be paid to the Treasurer of Frederick County prior to the occupancy of any structure on the property. 7.) Building Design New buildings shall be constructed using architectural styles and materials which are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Design elements shall be compatible with Frederick County and will respect the continuity and character of the existing architectural fabric of the surrounding community. All building facades shall be limited to one or a combination of the following materials: cast stone, stone, brick, glass, wood, stucco, or other high quality, long lasting masonry materials. Metal panels shall be prohibited as a construction material for buildings. Roof materials shall be standing seam metal, architectural shingle, or other high quality material. Flat roofs shall be permitted only to the extent that rooftop mechanical units are screened from the view of adjacent residences. Building height shall be limited to 35 feet as defined in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. page 3 • PROFFER STATEM*,_ PARCEL ID's: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 8.) Parcel Lighting The applicant recognizes that the illumination associated with future uses and improvements on the parcel could have an impact on the adjacent properties. In order to preclude any negative impacts, the applicant agrees to regulate the overall illumination level emanating from the parcel. At the same time, it is necessary to assure that public safety concerns will be satisfied from night time activity associated with future uses of the parcel. 1. Pole -mounted and wall -mounted luminaries shall meet the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) criteria for "cut off" fixtures where the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 25 at or above an angle of 90 degrees above nadir. Pole -mounted and wall -mounted luminaries shall not exceed a height of 18 feet as measured from the adjacent ground surface. 2. Front -lighted, freestanding signs shall be lighted from the top, and aimed and/or shielded so that no more that 100 candelas per 1,000 lamp lumens are emitted above a line that is struck through the lamp center and extends at an angle of 80 degrees relative to nadir after the luminaries are in their finally -focused position. 3. Internally and rear -lighted freestanding signs shall be limited to the illumination of the sign letters or characters only. No luminous backgrounds shall be permitted. 9.) Parcel Usage The applicant agrees to prohibit the following uses (as listed in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance) on the property: 1. Car Washes; 2. Fast food restaurants with drive through service windows; 3. Automotive dealers with outdoor display areas and gasoline service stations; 4. Model home sales offices; 5. Amusement and recreational services operated outdoors; 6. Self-service storage facilities; 7. Adult retail 10.) Preservation of Existing Vegetation Mature vegetation exists along the boundary between the parcel and adjacent residential lots. During the site plan process, the applicant will identify existing vegetation within the 25' inactive buffer which can reasonably be preserved and incorporated into the screening requirements as described by the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Any such vegetation will be shown within a "non -disturbance" area depicted on subsequent site plans. page 4 PROFFER STATEMRT 0 PARCEL Us: 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, 64A-4-20 The conditions proffered above shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in the interest of the owner. In the even that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors grant this rezoning and accepts these proffers, then these proffers shall apply to the land rezoned in addition to the other requirements of the Frederick County Code. Submitted By: On Behalf of DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. City/County of ,N lnd-)'��ity' Commonwealth Of Virginia. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 30 day of , 200 9 4tNr Public Notary Registration number: My commission expires: 10 l C"Ma On Behalf of Winchester Metals, Inc. City/County of �1 `��i���15� CommonweAalth Of Virginia. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this dU day of 1200 G It Not ry Public Notary Registration number: My commission expires: t 0 V 3 l page 5 / Will I EXISTING RESIDE TIAL LOTS IN / / t PRESERVAT EX ST NG/ EOGETOATION ET - / IN 25' NACTIVE BUFF R DID D / CARTER / / TMN64A-4-15 / / h ?s• 50' CAT. "B" BUFFER Z ZONING: RP / oQ RESIDENTIAL `� e�FFF 25' INACTIVE BUFFER J L R� Aso I 25' ACTIVE BUFFER n on a sR�� FULL SCREEN CARR rMp64A- 10- 10-1-6 � 3' S / ZONING: 82 O cD C7/ / / VACANT m / DMJ HOLDINGS LL i rn o o. o s � OERPARCEL ACCESS y CI - TO BICYCLE F ICILITIES EXISTING COMMERCIAL LOTS /n I I N O_ V _ -50, CARROLL N _--L-I T #5 ZONING: 2 A 0 O ' ---- �- VACANT m IOINTERPARCEL ACCESS n OPEDESTRIAN WALKS m CI m Z m rn — — rn -- � vv� -- -___ � r C- N \� - �OVrE781 7C =O ` S<<�O . \ - TE�ENUE _ 6_ FF 06 C Z v RIGHT TU LANE AND TAPER ��/��kE 3C 4' RAISED MEDIAN G) 3a RIGHT IN/RI OUT ENTRANCE �S 9o�/ O �p �• O� � y F$� RIGHT TURN LANE r 3b RIGHT IN ONLY ENTRANCE S r— m ZZ \ S 1 \ 0 Z \ EXP SION OF LEFT TURN LANE sp �L00 _ W -0 o nL \ 3d STORA CAPACITY �.' FF O p y o rn f < \SA- y //j 4s q01 \ a m � Q Mpy TFso O N 0 O Z (� m o O z:- n 46 • Rezoning Comments Virainiai Department of Transportation inx Mail to 'Hand: deliver to: Virginia Department of Transportation Virginia.Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Engineer'' Attn: Resident Engineer 14031 Old Valley Pike! 2275 Nordawestern Pike Edinburg, Virainia, 22-04W -gVhz�'inia 2260' (540) 984-560.0 Applicant: Please �6111 O�Atiih'a-information as -accurately:a,s. possible in order to assist the Virginia Department' of!T-i-'an'sportatioiI with thei).r review. Afta-ch threecopies of your ysis, i application form., lo.ca;ti6n -map.; proffer statement, impact -anal -ald any other . p . ertinent infoimatioll'. Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: Zn Location of property: are-, Corr and Ave_ Current zoning: Zorffiig request6d'.- Acreage: DS57 Virginia Department of Tr'ansportation Comments: See attached e-mail from'VDOT to Painter -Lewis, PLC dated June 8, 2009. 20( VDOTF Signature & Date: June 8, 2009 W INI tic-e -o VVD0T - Please Return.. �rn to Applicant 0 u m to A, plicant M DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoiip - VDOT Comments Page 1 of 1 John Lewis • From: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Ingram, Lloyd [Lloyd.ingram@VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:02 AM To: jclewis@painterlewis.com Cc: John.Bishop; Ingram, Lloyd Subject: DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning - VDOT Comments The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have a significant measurable impact on Routes 50 and 781. These routes are the VDOT roadways which has been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT has reviewed the transportation proffers offered in the DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning Application dated July 1, 2009 addressing the transportation concerns associated with this request. It appears, after reviewing these proposed proffers for the improvements required for this rezoning, the improvements meet the threshold of acceptance for VDOT. There is one significant concern which VDOT needs to point out: Residents in subdivisions which are served by Route 781 who utilize this facility, will be required to travel west on Route 50 and make a U-turn at the intersection of Route 50 and Ryco Lane. Traffic then will travel west to the intersection of Route 50 and Route 781. If the Frederick County Board approves this rezoning, the potential for a negative impact on the flow of east bound Route 50 traffic at the intersection of Ryco • Lane and Route 50 could be significant. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right- of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Lloyd A. Ingram, Ti•anspof-tation Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation Edinburg Residency — Land Development 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Vhginia 22824 Phone #(540) 984-5611 Fax #(540) 984-5607 8/18/2009 DMJ Holdings, LLC - VDOT Con -0nts to Rezonings Page 1 of 2 6i Fries om: Funkhouser, Rhonda [Rhonda.Funkhouser@VDOT.Virginia.gov] on behalf of Hoffman, Gregory [Gregory.Hoffman@VDOT.Virginia.gov] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 12:58 PM To: Jill Fries Cc: Hoffman, Gregory; John Bishop; timstowe@stowecompanies.com; Ingram, Lloyd Subject: DMJ Holdings, LLC - VDOT Comments to Rezonings In order to expedite this review, we are providing our comments without District input. Therefore, additional VDOT comments may be forthcoming. The documentation within the application to rezone this property appears to have significant measurable impact on Routes 50 and 781. These routes are the VDOT roadways which have been considered as the access to the property referenced. VDOT is not satisfied that the transportation proffers offered in the Route 50 at Custer Avenue/DMJ Holdings, LLC rezoning application dated March 24, 2009 address transportation concerns associated with this request. Specifically: . These proffers assume the Governor's Hill associated improvements will either be in place or occur concurrently with this development. There is no guarantee this will happen. Therefore, if this development occurs first, those improvements may need to be completed with this project. It is suggested the developer contact the developers of Governor's Hill to discuss possible cost sharing of necessary improvements between these two projects. . We have deep concerns with preventing left turn movements north bound on Custer Avenue into the site entrance. How will this be addressed? . Route 50 east bound left turn lane will need to be extended. . How will U-Turns in the gore area be controlled by west bound traffic leaving your site? This is a potentially dangerous situation which needs to be addressed. Before development, this office will require a complete set of construction plans detailing entrance designs, drainage features, and traffic flow data from the I.T.E. Trip Generation Manual, Seventh Edition for review. VDOT reserves the right to comment on all right-of-way needs, including right-of-way dedications, traffic signalization, and off -site roadway improvements and drainage. Any work performed on the State's right- of-way must be covered under a land use permit. This permit is issued by this office and requires an inspection fee and surety bond coverage. �11k you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. <<SCN 20090608124853_001.pdf>> 6/8/2009 DMJ Holdings, LLC - VDOT Com0ts to Rezonings 0 Page 2 of 2 Gregory T. Hoffman, Supervisor inia Department of Transportation brag Residency — Land Development 22/5 Northwestern Pike Winchester, VA 22603 Phone #(540) 535-1824 Fax #(540) 535-1546 0' 6/8/2009 From:LIFESAFE • &2/2009 11:44 #816 P.001/001 10 41CK ty O x y w ra t VIRGINIA Control number Date received R209-0001 4/1/2009 Project Name Route 50 at Custer Ave. Address City 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester Type Application Tax ID Number Rezoning 64A-4-16 Current Zoning )ac - reviewed Date Pevi: ed 0 !12009 Applic; it DMJ LLC Jo'ainter-Lewis, PLC itz"� !1p Applica-: Phone do >2601 540-66 ' 9G00 Fire Disc .t Rescue District 21 21 RP Recommendation; Automatic Sprinkler System Automatic Fire Alarm System No No Other recommendation Emergency Vehicle Access Hydrant Location Not Identified Not Identified Siamese Location Roadway/Aisleway Width Not Identified Not Identified Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By sigliatu •e f Yes J. Neal rule Election Disln Shawnee F esiJential Sprinkler System No Fir! Lane Required No Special Hazards No C�l 0 • Mr John- Lewis P.E Painter Lewis, P.L.0 817 Cedar Creek Grade, S\iite 1'20 Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE Rezoning Application for DMJ Holdings, LLC Frederick County Virginia Dear. Mr Lewis: COUNTY of F.REDERICK April 8, 2009 Department of Public Works 540/ 665-5643 FAX S40/67.8-0682 We have completed our°review of the proposed rezoning,of 2 8S acres near the intersection of Custer Avenue and Route 50 and offer -the following cornblents. '1 -Refer-lb—the discussion of the site suitability on page 2 of the impact analysis Expand the discussion to include the potential existence of water wells and drainfields. These items should • be accurately located on 'future site plans -with references .to appropriate abandonment procedui-es rin accordance with. the Virginia. Department of Health guidelines. 2 Refer to the discussion -of traffic on page 3 of the impact -analysis. 'The discussion indicates that the site has frontage on both Custer Avenue and Millwood Pike.. In actuality, access to Custer Avenue is via the old Route 50 right- of —'way tt is possible -that this property -could b6-obtamed from -the Virginia Department of Transportation for the proposed proffered access improvements from Custer•Avenue I can be reached at 722-8214 Ifyou should have -any questions regarding the above con-iments Sincercly, l-IarveY E*. ''t..wsnrader Jr P.E. Y Director of.Pdblic Works I-IES/rls cc Planning and Development file T:\_RhondalTGdIP_ CONUNIENTS\DMJHOLD INGSLLCR'r5o&CUSTER.A-M.ERElCOM.c16c. 107'North. Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601 5000 FEB-16-2005 18:11 0-ord Fairfax Health Distr 540 722 "W?9 P.02/02 41�1- Co • Rezoxiing Comments Frederick -Winchester Health Department • Mail to: Frederick -Winchester health Department Attu: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 722-34-80 Hand deliver to - Frederic k-Wirichester Health Depwtment Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent Street Suite 201 Winchester, Virginia Applicant;-Flease-fi1P out the in -formation as accurately as possible in orcier.ta.assist the - .-.- Frederick-Winchester Health Department with their review. Attach a copy of your application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis., and any other pertinent information. Applicant's Name: DrY1� ��ldcai Telephotle: b2*2- Mailing Address: /U S PY-alcy/,� Location of property:�--- 6( Ault �D S& Current Zoning: r---I Zoning requested: _: Acreage: Frederick-Winchestcr Health Department's Comments: 171 Health Dept. Signature & Date: Notice to Dcalth Department - Please Return This Form to the Applicant 24 RM-IV E0 AFR (11 TOTAL P.02 0 • Rezoning Cotiltnelits FI-ederielz County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Attn: Engineer P.O. Box 1877 Wit1e11ester, Virginia 2260/1 (540) 868-1061 Hand deliver to: F['CCICricl( County Salutation Authority Attu: Engineer 315 Taskcr Road Stephens City, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Sanitation Authority with their review. Attach a copy ofy6tu' application form, location map, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent information. Applicant's Name: D� 000f/�6 t� Telephone: b%-6IOUo 1\'lailing Address: ek pal ll�►r-l-�(��(5 �� C. McObho (('wo ) La i, 1 ,/� �� (0(2 Location of property: �'Q e�S a l ��t�/Ca/ , l/,t) Sj Cum/ e ('nrrCnf 7)nin0: 4 p Zoning rcgLICStCCI: Acreage: �S Sanitation Authoriti' Commcllts:- .�if�R� 1 i f/o 7-6 f Sanitation Atlthoi'tt)' SIg1latUre DatC; C -,- Notice to Sanitation 't . Iorlty - Please Return This Form to the Applicant 23 U • Rezoning Comments Frederick -Winchester Service Authority Mail to: Tied-Winc Service Authority Attn: Jesse \V. Nloffett, Executive Director P.O. Box 43 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 722-3579 Hand deliver to: I7red-Winc Service Authority Attn: Jesse W. Moffett 107 North Kent Street Wlncllcster, Virginia Applicant: Please filt out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Fred-Winc Service Authority with their review. Attacli a copy of your application form, locrltior{ 11'ap, proffe!- statement impact oral 'sib, and any other per'thient infal!'Ination, Applicant's Name: JiI��`I Telephone: Mailing Address: Cat, 0(7� LeCtli.S �I - - /)ii, ) n )-ebC S. bar Location of property: /(,I/ f✓ —2i Ui"( 1 Cal MLI n- 6y Pak-- S a?'ll Cup l r .tip. Current zoning: _ Pp Zoning requested: J Acreage: Fred-Winc Service Authority's Comments: �Y) GNVMIII Fred-Winc Service Authority'. Signature �C Date: �� . Lwl^^ - Notice to Fred-Winc Service Authority - Please Return Form to Applicant 31 • • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 April 13, 2009 Mr. John Lewis Painter — Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Request for Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comments DMJ Holdings, LLC Property Rezoning; PIN # 64A-4-16A, 16,17,18,19, 20 Zoning District: Proposed 132, Currently RP Dear Mr. Lewis: Upon review of the proposed rezoning, it appears that the proposal does not significantly impact historic resources and it is not necessary to schedule a formal review of the rezoning application • by the HRAB. According to the Rural Landmarks Survey, there are no significant historic structures located on the properties nor are there any possible historic districts in the vicinity. It was also noted that the National Park Service Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley does not identify a core battlefield within this area. Thank you for the chance to comment on this application. Please call if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, z Candice E. Perkins, AICP Senior Planner 'L,If cc: Rhoda Kriz, HRAB Chairman 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • L� ezoni menu Fredei-idCounty Department of Parks & Recreation Mail to: Frederick County Department of Parks & Rccreation 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 (540) 665-5678 Hand deliver to: "" Frederick County Department of Parks & Recreation County Administration Bldg., 2nd floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia Applicant: Please Fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Department of Parks & Recreation with their review. Attach a copy of your annlication form, location slap, proffer statement, impact analysis, and any other pertinent Applicant's Name: Telephone: Mailing Address: Cif PPCr(f * L OS & A-4r4\J1 O'-d1S 8L7 Cfc/ra1- 01-dCC 67j3'ZC � r C, CcJrr�c/'1�ttc�^,y�r2�L�C. Location of property: c�,-jx�� /if k'a sb a/ri cafELl- Current zoning: 9r Zoning renuestcd: Fa Acreage: .S 5 Department of Parks & Recreation Colnlnellts: NO COMMENT Pks. & Rec. Signature & Date: Notice to Department of Parks & Recreation - l Please Return This Form to the Applicant 21 2009-Apr-30 04:41 per rederick County Public Schoo 5406624237 2/2 0 0 $ . U 0/ $qpa-ip- m,�jf.fq to: e*,d6&k Cou4t 'VmWk AO.JkAh'404o.-ash fill, p q "U- Eii Oil[ -A" i . .-L.I,r - -T'ep'AOl%:,-U1 - qCOO --. Mailing Address, Olkc0/..� pmrcis are LPt.54 q1J. mvwit'T ; .- Owxr d-. 4o�-- CatrKmf.w ...g; ... - P1,11 ; Pp - and LJ • Re7,0I11I16 COIl1lnelltS Winchester Regional Airport Mail to: tiVirlcliester Regional Airport Attn: EXCClltive Director 491 Airport Road Winchester, Virginia 22602 (540) 662-2422 Hand deliver to: Winchester Regional Airport Attn: Executive Director 491 Airport Road (Rt. 645, off of Rt. 522 South) Winchester, Virginia Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Winchester Regional Airport with their review. Attach a cony of, Our allplic:i±ion f0l"11, location map, proffer statement, impact aIlalysis, and any other pertinent inforlllflti011. Applicant's Name: l�T�I� Telephone: Mailing Address: • 7 /i Location of propel•ty: �f S LLI G�( ,V)r" K 6f kOvl�f 96 Cli'1C/ Q E Current zoning: 0 Zoning requested 46D Acreage: Winchester Regional Airport's Comments: '\Vinchester Regional Airport's � Signature Sc Date: �>\���� i %\ — I Notice to Winchester• Regional Airport - Please Return T orm to Applicant 11 28 -i-��0 WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORT 1 SERVING THE 491 AIRPORT ROAD iOP OF VIRGIN!% WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22602 _THo 0" (540) 662-2422 April 27, 2009 Jill Fries Painter -Lewis, PLC 816 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Rezoning Comment — RA to B2 DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Shawnee Magisterial District Dear Ms. Fries: The proposed rezoning request for DMJ Holdings, LLC would be considered compatible with airport operations. It appears that this type of rezoning will not impact business operations of the Winchester Regional Airport. •We do request review of the site plan once it is developed. Applicant should be i made aware that prior to site work being performed, in accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2294, and the Federal Aviation Administration, the applicant must file a Notice of Proposed Construction, FAA Form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration for proposed structure(s) and a separate 7460-1 for construction equipment. Copies need to be forwarded to this office for record and review. Final comment on a site plan will be withheld pending the FAA's final determination which should a copy forwarded to this office. This process could take upwards of sixty, (60) days and can be filed online. If you need further information, do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to review this request. Sincerely, * Nrcovu_�k Serena R. Manuel Executive Director • • Rezoning Application • 0 Route 50 at Custer Ave. DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. 345 Phelpsmore Lane Winchester, VA 22602 Or, 2 0 2009 Applicant: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Mr. Mark Phelps Submitted By: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 540-662-5792 Job# 0812002 • n u 0-- 0 0 Table of Contents 1. Application 2. Location Map, Aerial Photo 3. Deed to Parcels 4. Taxes Current S. Agency Comments 6. Impact Analysis Statement 7. Traffic Impact Analysis S. Proffer Statement COUNTY of FRI DERICK i Roderick B. Williams County Attorney 540/722-8383 Fax 540/667-0370 May 8, 2009 E-mail: r�villia@ co.l'rederick.va.us VIA FACSIMILE — (540) 662-5793 — AND REGULAR MAIL Mr. John Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade Winchester VA 22601 Re: DMJ Holdings, LLC — Route 50 and Custer Avenue — Proposed Rezoning — Proffer Statement dated March 24, 2009 Dear John: You have submitted to Frederick County for review a proposed proffer statement dated March 24, 2009 (the "Proffer Statement") for the proposed rezoning of 2.85± acres • constituting the property of DMJ Holdings, LLC ("DMJ") and others, Parcel Identification Numbers 64A-4-16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19, and 64A- 4-20 (collectively, the "Property"), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, from the RP (Residential Performance) District to the B2 (Business General) District. I have now reviewed the Proffer Statement and it is my opinion that the Proffer Statement would be in a form to meet the requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and the Code of Virginia, and would be legally sufficient as a proffer statement, subject to the following comments: 1. With respect to Parcels 64A-4-16 and 64A-4-17, as best as I am able to dote;:;-:ine, it :,pYears !hat \Vinchester Metals. Inc. still holds an undivided one-half interest in the parcels. Specifically, the most recent deed for the parcels, Instrument Number 050023688, indicates that that interest was conveyed to C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc., now known as Winchester Metals, Inc. The materials do not, however, indicate that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., from which DMJ claims title, ever acquired the interest of C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc. 2. With respect to Parcel 64A-4-16A, likewise, it appears that Winchester Metals, Inc. still holds an undivided one-half interest in that parcel. The deed from the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner for the parcel, at Deed • Book 700, Page 225, indicates that the interest was conveyed to Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc., now known as Winchester Metals, Inc. The materials 107 North Kent Strect • Winchester, Virginia 22601 • 0 Mr. John Lewis May 8, 2009 • Page 2 do not, however, indicate that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., from which DMJ claims title, ever acquired the interest of Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc. 3. Proffer 2 — The heading is incorrect in that it refers to Route 657 and Route 656, instead of to Route 781 and Route 50. 4. Proffer 2 — The proffer should indicate a date/event by which the improvements will be completed. Right now, the proffer states only that they will be designed and submitted for approval during the site plan review process. 5. Proffer 3 — The proffer should indicate a date/event by which the easements will be recorded. Right now, the proffer states only that the easement :rill be defined during the site plan process. 6. Proffer 5 — The proffer should indicate that the amount will be paid prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, rather than "prior to the occupancy', as it now states. 7. On page 4, in the last paragraph, the second line, "even" should be "event". 8. The signature block on the Proffer Statement indicates that Mark Phelps is acting by power of attorney. If Mr. Phelps is already a member, manager, or officer of DMJ and is authorized to act for DMJ in that capacity, the County could accept the Proffer Statement signed by Mr. Phelps directly on behalf of the DMJ. Otherwise, the County would need to receive a power of attorney, duly executed on behalf of DMJ, for such other person as may execute the Proffer Statement. I have not reviewed the substance of the proffers as to whether the proffers are suitable and appropriate for this specific development, as my understanding is that that review will be done by staff and the Planning Commission. /SincerIe Roderick B. Williams County Attorney cc: Michael Ruddy, AICP, Deputy Director of Planning and Development RE: DMJ Holdings, LLC • • Pagel of 3 Fries ,m: Rod Williams frwillia@co.frederick.va.usj Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 8:36 AM To: 'John Lewis' Cc: 'Jill Fries'; 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: RE: DMJ Holdings, LLC John, I have gone back and reviewed what appear to be the relevant records for this matter and must respectfully disagree with your assertion that DMJ Holdings, LLC currently has clear title to a 100% interest in tax parcel numbers 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, and 64A-4-16A. Specifically, with respect to lots 16 and 17, 1 find that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., formerly known (prior to 1/22/1986) as Zuckerman Company, Inc., made the following separate conveyances of undivided one-half interests in the two lots: On 11/14/1975, by deed recorded in Deed Book 451 at Page 655, to C&S Steel & Fabricating, Inc., which was later known as Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc., and is today (since 7/1/2004) known as Winchester Metals, Inc. On 10/12/2005, by deed recorded as Instrument Number 050023688, to DMJ Holdings, LLC. OTherefore, unless Winchester Metals, Inc., under that name or one of its previous names, conveyed its u iided one-half interest to DMJ Holdings, LLC or to DMJ's predecessor -in -interest, Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc., formerly known as Zuckerman Company, Inc. (and I am unable to find any such conveyance in the land records from 1983 forward that are indexed electronically), I remain firmly of the view that DMJ Holdings, Inc. does not hold title to a 100% interest in lots 16 and 17. With respect to lot 16A, the deed from the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner was jointly to Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. and to Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc. Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. and Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc., as the language in the middle of the second page of the 2005 deed to DMJ Holdings, LLC makes clear, are two separate entities, with the former now being Winchester Metals, Inc. As with lots 16 and 17, while Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. has conveyed its interest in lot 16A to DMJ Holdings, LLC, I find no record that Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc., now known as Winchester Metals, Inc., has done the same. I must note as well that I respectfully further disagree with your assertion that the County real estate records show that "DMJ and Winchester Metals are the same". First, the fact that both names are listed in the tax records does not mean that the County considers the two entities to be one and the same, rather the double listing means that the County considers the two entities to be co -owners. In fact, the County would have no means, nor likely the authority, to make the determination in its tax records that two entities are one and the same. The records of the State Corporation Commission, however, which are the only authoritative records as existence of Virginia business entities, clearly indicate that DMJ and Winchester Metals are not one #,e he same. The SCC records show DMJ Holdings, LLC with SCC ID number S076841-8 and a creation da�z of 4/23/2002 and Winchester Metals, Inc. with SCC ID number 0161939-4 and a creation date of 10/1/1975, that is, two separate entities. Finally, for DMJ Holdings, LLC and Winchester Metals, Inc. to be 7/15/2009 RE: DINU Holdings, LLC 0 0 Page 2 of 3 one and the same would appear to be a legal impossibility, as one (DMJ) is organized as a Virginia limited ity company and the other (Winchester Metals) is organized as a Virginia corporation. As one further note, I would observe that, if DMJ Holdings, LLC and Winchester Metals, Inc. are now under common ownership, the mere fact of any such common ownership would not render the two entities one and the same. The common ownership may be able to direct one to convey its interest in the subject properties to the other, but absent such an action, the ownership of the subject properties appears to be had by two legally separate entities, meaning that DMJ Holdings, LLC would need Winchester Metals, Inc. to join it in any rezoning application for the subject properties. VMS Roderick B. Williams County Attorney County of Frederick, Virginia 107 North Kent Street, 3rd Floor Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (540) 722-8383 19imile: (540) 667-0370 E-mail: rwillia(a-)co.frederick.va.us -----Original Message ----- From: John Lewis[rnailto:jclewis@painterlewis.com] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 11:18 AM To: rwillia@co.frederick.va.us Cc: 'Jill Fries'; 'Mike Ruddy' Subject: DMJ Holdings, LLC =1 You recently sent me comments on the rezoning for DMJ. I am trying to sort through the first two comments. The first concern is that there is no evidence that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. acquired the interest of C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc. in the two p cels identified as 64A-4-16 and 64A-4-17. It appears to me that Z.__,,,erman Company, Inc. conveyed half interest to C &Sin 1975. The n in 7/15/2009 RE: DMJ Holdings, LLC 0 • Page 3 of 3 2005, Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. conveyed (the other) half interest to DMJ. OS is now Winchester Metals, Inc. (a.k.a. DMJ Holdings) and Zuckerman Co. in now Zuckerman Enterprises. The second concern is that Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. did not acquire the interest of Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc. on the parcel identified as 64A-4-16A. The deed dated 1998 conveyed half interest to Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc which subsequently changed its name to Winchester Metals, Inc. (a.k.a. DMJ Holdings). The same deed conveyed half interest to Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. which conveyed same to DMJ in 2005. The name changes are listed in the deed. The county real estate records show that DMJ and Winchester Metals are the same. Please let me know if you concur with this. Oks John C. Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Vnchester, VA 22601 Off.: 540-662-5792 Fax.: 540-662-5793 Cel.: 540-323-5559 7/15/2009 • 0 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: S40/665-6395 TO: John Lewis FROM: Michael T. Ruddy, AICP fir Denutv Director RE: Rezoning Notes — ROL1tc 50 @ Custcr AVe11Uc, DMJ Holdings, LLC DATE: May 26, 2009 The following additional points are offered regarding the Route 50 a Custcr Avenue, DM.I I-Ioldings, LLC Rezoning application. Please consider them as you continue your work preparing the application for submission to 1�rederick County. Route 50 @ Custer Avenue, DMJ Holdings, LLC Rezoning — Additional Rezoning, Nn1f-c General. This property is located in an area that is adjacent to a number ol� established residential properties. Special consideration should be provided to ensure that the Impacts to the adjacent residential properties and neighborhood are considered. It does not appear as though sufficient evaluation of the potential uses impacts on the adjacent residential properties has been provided. Particular effort should be made to provide for enhanced design of the project to facilitate improved corridor appearance and the sensitive integration of the project into the SUITOLIndlllg community. Landscaping, lighting, and bUllding layout and 1`01'111 ShOUld be carefully planned to enSlll'e that this IS achieved. The elevation Of the site compared w1tI1 the adjacent residential properties ShOUld also be considered. • Transportation. 17 The evaluation Of the access and immediate transportation impacts of this request does not adequately address the potential impacts and access issues that this property needs to deal �vvith. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Wincliester, Virginia 22601-S000 • Route 50 a Custer Avenue, DM,1 Holdings, LLC Rezoning — Preliminary Rezoning Comments May 26, 2009 Page 2 The location of the property in relation to the existing road network, and particularly its Close In•oximity to Custcr Avenue and Route 50, highlights significant access issues. As stated in the impact analysis, access to both rights -of -way would be problematic without thorough analysis. A thorough analysis and an appropriate solution to this should be provided with this rezoning application, rather than with a future site plan as proposed. Preliminary design, right-of-way constraints, environmental impacts to the wetland areas on both sides of existing Custcr Avenue, access to the adjacent properties, access management oil Route 50, and timing of improvements proffered by others which may impact the conclusions of the TIA are some of the considerations that should be addressed prior to this application's acceptance for the Planning Commission. Bicycle and pedestrian accommodations should be considered at this tinic in connection with the proposed improvements and should relate to the surrounding neighborhoods and Route 50. It is anticipated that development may occur on the property to the cast of this parcel. The evaluation of inter -parcel circulation and access should be a greater consideration in • this location. It may be beneficial to incorporate the adjacent property as part of the solution to the development issues in this location. Any improvements proposed to access this site should not negatively impact the adjacent site's access. Rather, all approach should be proposed that would accommodate the (level oplllcilt of both properties. Proffer Statement. Any Fire and Rescue Proffer should be designated as being to Frederick County for Fire and Rescue Purposes. Similar to the approach provided with the recent Senseny Road Rezoning, which you _ ,n pfcp red, a grcater:iiiiit�iiii Uf "AeL,ii i,0111..1 , ,?•� 1)1-0%idekl xi1,1t i,le pr`Jllei•Cii Ci):r. A proffer specifying an amount of development has not been provided. Therefore, please ensure that the impact statcmenCs analysis is based upon the full development of the property. As an example, please provide the anticipated amount of usage of water and waste water based upon the full development of this site. Additional Comments Provided by Mr. John Bishop, COL111ty Transportation Planner A significant alllol111t of additional work is needed to determine if safe access for commercial use of this property is possible. Particular attention will need to be paid to restricting left turns off of Custcr Avenue too close to its intersection with Route 50. It would appear that any solution that leads to that end will need to include the neighboring B2 parcel. i 0 Route 50 a Custer Avenue, DMJ Iloldings, LL,C Rezoning — Preliminary Rezoning Comments Nlay 26, 2009 Page 3 If right In right out is allowed on Route 50, the distance to the next crossover will need to be analyzed for weaving risks (if it is too near to the entrance) and potential improvements. Above notes aside, staff currently feels it is unlikely that a truly appropriate entrance scheme for commercial use can be attained given the limitations faced by this property. Staff feels, based on that, it may be inappropriate to rezone this property to a more intense use than currently allowed under the existing zoning. NITR/bad cc: Mr. John Bishop, County Transportation Planner . Page 1 of 1 John Lewis • From: Mike Ruddy [mruddy@co.frederick.va.usj Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:12 PM To: John Lewis Subject: DMJ - Route 50 Hi John, I believe John Bishop has forwarded a couple of points to you regarding this application. Please ensure that John's and VDOT's concerns are addressed. From my perspective, the application has made progress. I would continue to promote sensitivity to the adjacent residences and additional site design elements to guide the development of the site. Please confirm that the 35' height limitation would recognize the B2 exception allowable for hotels and motels, among other things. Naturally, with the high point of the lots being closer to the existing residences, the building location could minimize or increase the level of impact to the adjacent properties depending on its ultimate placement. The lighting proffer should be simplified to avoid the intent narrative and the standards evaluated against current requirements. Flexibility to the ultimate construction of the transportation improvements may be helpful. The timing of the improvements, and any other improvements proffered by others, should be further evaluated and described in the event that this project proceeds ahead of the others. The monetary transportation proffer may be tweaked in recognition of this element of the project. The final location of bike and pedestrian accommodations should also remain relatively flexible but consistent with the approach you •have illustrated. As suggested previously, a continuation of the sidewalk approximately 200 feet to connect with the existing sidewalk in Raven Point may be achievable with this project. 0- Please address those elements you can as part of the final submission to the County. It looks like we will also need a plat of rezoning. Thanks. Mike. 8/12/2009 Page 1 of 1 John Lewis • From: John Bishop Ubishop@co.frederick.va.usj Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:17 AM To: John Lewis Subject: DMJ John; • I have reviewed the updated materials that you submitted and would offer the following; 1. 1 think that a proffer that leaves the door open for cooperation between the applicant, VDOT, and the County to work out the best entrance and interconnectivity designs at site plan phase would be appropriate. 2. Based upon the recent rezoning at Old Charles Town and Route 11, the rezoning you did on Senseny Road, and the importance of Route SO to the County transportation system it seems that the cash proffer for transportation does not offset the impacts of this rezoning. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. John Jolui 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 jbishop@co.firederick.vams 8/18/2009 • 0 • IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT for DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Route 50 East & Custer Avenue Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia March 24, 2009 Revised: July 2, 2009 Revised: August 19, 2009 Prepared for: DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. Mr. Mark Phelps 345 Phelpsmore Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 Prepared by: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, VA 22601 • Tel.: (540)662-5792 email: office@painterlewis.com `" Job Number: 0812002 • is r 1 U IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS cartinn i. INTRODUCTION 2 A. SITE SUITABILITY 2 B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES 3 C. TRAFFIC 4 D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT 5 E. WATER SUPPLY 5 F. DRAINAGE 5 G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES 5 H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES 5 I. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 6 J. LOT CONSOLIDATION 6 K. HOA MEETING RESULTS 6 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • i.INTRODUCTION DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. (the applicant) proposes to rezone six parcels of land located on the north side of Route 50 at its intersection with Custer Avenue in Frederick County, VA. The parcels (the site) are currently zoned RP (Residential Performance District) and are identified by the following Tax Identification Numbers: Tax Map No. Area (acres) Ex. Zoning Pr. Zoning 64A-4-16A 0.0355 RP B2 64A-4-16 0.6887 RP B2 64A-4-17 0.75 44 RP B2 64A-4-18 0.6112 RP B2 64A-4-19 0.5318 RP B2 64A-4-20 0.2311 RP B2 Total 2.85 The applicant is requesting to rezone the properties from RP, Residential Performance District to B2, Business General District. The total area of the request is approximately 2.85 acres. Please refer to Exhibit 1 on the following page. The intended purpose of the rezoning is to enable the applicant to develop the site for • commercial purposes. A. SITE SUITABILITY The subject parcels are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 and Custer Avenue. The description of B2 zoning in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance states that general business areas are located at major intersections, involve frequent and direct access by the general public, and should have direct access to major thoroughfares. All the other parcels fronting on this intersection are currently zoned B2 or contain commercial uses. This site is suited for rezoning to the Business General District. The Eastern Frederick County Long Range Land Use Plan designates these parcels as "Business". The parcels are within the Urban Development Area and the Sewer and Water Service Area. If any existing wells and drainfields are identified on the properties, they will be located and appropriately abandoned at the time of development. 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN FIRM Community Panel Number 510063 0115 B shows the subject area to be outside of any flood hazard zone. WETLANDS No wetlands have been identified on this site. As a result of the development of this site, construction activities will occur off site. In the event that construction will impact off site • wetlands, the requisite permits will have to be obtained to allow disturbance of `. jurisdictional wetlands. 2 � ' I PE-�1 MBR'DGE AVENUE — W IN / / W IW Cq �/0 �IZ�5 1 / � 6.05 z I / N / \ �/ ��O� / M / 1 0 I ¢ = i a � v � / o' - -w �Zw Wo Io Z` w' V O N Q N 1.�Z ~ ' tp ON Y•../�A o a <0, J �m l a m z a V w 1 O z KO?O10 maow Mx o§ , o �N OJdz o� 1 =go a. 0�0 — — S Z ,ONE 1 V ZdZQvi / Oo QZU�mmV O l z j / 1-0 0W Z -0 O a r` 0�NU � o z a eH¢zu W d6zV1MN \\ � o I zu / 2-2 PROJECT: SURVEY: C 1 PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. NA NA 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Site 120 PROPERTY REZONING MAP DRAWN BY: 8BP-L2002 Winchester, Virginia 22601 DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. SCALE: DATE: Telephone (540)662-5792 00.0' 3/5/09 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SHEET: ENGINEERS Email office@pointeriewis.com EXHIBIT 1 V I i z i DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. DRAWN BY Route 50 East & Custer Ave. PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. Frederick Co., Virginia 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 SCALE: NTS DRAWN BY: JLF WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 TELEPHONE (540) 662-5792 DATE:08-18-09 Joe /oaizooz FACSIMILE (540) 662-5793 DRAWING No.: EMAIL: officeOpainterlewis.com AERIAL EXHIBIT • IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • STEEP SLOPES According to the soil survey information there are no steep slopes located on this site. The general elevation of the site is lower than the adjacent residential lots and therefore, the apparent height of commercial buildings will be minimized when viewed from the neighborhood. MATURE WOODLANDS There are no mature woodlands located on this site. SOILS According to the Soil Survey of Frederick County, the site contains the following soil types: • Blairton silt loam: 3C (7-15%) This soil is moderately deep, strongly sloping, and somewhat poorly drained. It is mostly found along heads of drainage ways and in broad upland depressions. • Weikert-Berks channery silt loams: 41 D (15-25%) This consists of shallow and moderately deep, moderately steep, well drained soils on side slopes and ridges. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The parcels to be rezoned are bordered to the north by residential properties contained • within the Pembridge Heights subdivision. The parcel to the west is residential. The parcel to the east is zoned B2 and is vacant. The parcels directly across Route 50 to the south are all zoned B2. The following table lists all adjacent owners and parcel numbers. Tax Map No. Owner Ex. Zonin Ex. Use 64A-4-20A Carroll, James H. B2 Vacant 64A-10-1-B Carroll, James H. B2 Vacant 64A-10-1-153 Schraff, Timothy & Amanda RA Residential ! 64A-10-1-152 Pyle, Glenn RP Residential 64A-10-1-151 Bryant, Thomas & Stephanie RA Residential 64-A-93 EFG Investments, LLC B2 Vacant 64A-10-1-145 Rhyne, Jer & Julie RA Residential 64A-10-1-144 Pritchett, Elyse & Ralph RA Residential 64A-4-15 Carter, Jan RP Residential 64-A-89A Marlow Investments, LC B2 Commercial 64A-A-13 Winchester Outdoor RP Commercial C. TRAFFIC The property is located at the signalized intersection of Custer Avenue and Route 50. According to the Frederick County Eastern Road Plan, Route 50 is designated as a six . lane, divided, urban section. At the location of the site, Route 50 is generally a four lane, divided, rural section. Please refer to the existing conditions plan shown on Exhibit 2 on 3 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • the following page. There are no long range plans for altering Custer Avenue from its current configuration. Access to the site will be carefully planned to insure safe and efficient traffic flow. The site has frontage on both Custer Avenue and Millwood Pike, however, access from both rights of way could be problematic without thorough analysis. The future traffic patterns should be planned with consideration given to the adjacent commercially zoned parcel identified by Tax Map #64A-4-20B. While access to Custer Avenue would allow traffic exiting the site to utilize the existing traffic signal at Route 50, there appears to be insufficient stacking depth for southbound traffic. Therefore, the applicant is proposing a "right in" only from Custer Avenue that will serve only southbound traffic coming from the residential neighborhoods located to the north and east of the site. Please refer to the Location Map in Section 2 of this report. The primary access to the site is proposed to come from Route 50. Route 50 is a divided highway, therefore the access is proposed as a right in/right out only entrance. Interparcel access will be granted to the adjacent parcels (Tax Map #64A-4-20B and Tax Map #64A-4-15). This will provide the means to limit the number of access points on both Custer Avenue and Route 50. A Traffic Impact Analysis is contained in Section 7. The analysis was performed by Stowe Engineering, PLC. The TIA as presented is based on a build -out of the site • which would include intensive traffic generators. The TIA assumes the construction of a 60 room hotel and a convenience store with eight fueling positions. These particular uses were proposed to achieve a high level of trips generated by the proposed site and thus to make provisions for street improvements that may result from the rezoning. According to figures from the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Average Annual Daily Traffic on Route 50, Millwood Pike, in 2004 in the vicinity of the site was 20,000 vehicles/day. Custer Avenue, Route 781, had an AADT of 1900 vehicles/day in 2004. The TIA shows that traffic that may result from the rezoning represents a minor portion of the projected traffic from existing and future developments. The TIA points out that there are now proffered improvements for the intersection of Route 50 and Prince Frederick Drive (Custer Ave.) that are associated with the Governors Hill project. With Phase 2 of the Governors Hill project the following improvements are proffered for the Route 50/Prince Frederick Drive intersection: • Construction of a second northbound left turn lane; • Extension of the storage for the northbound right turn lane; • Extension of the storage for the eastbound left turn lane; • Extension of the storage for the westbound left turn lane. The TIA recommends that additional improvements to this intersection be proffered in association with this rezoning that would include: 4 RID E - Q F 1 I f 1 ( I f ' I 1 1 I 1 I J ! f f9zq 1 --a, >1\ 1 a / '1 U J Z �\ _j \ v� _ / J Q? QS Q�' 41 \ \� �0 T PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. PROJECT NARVEY C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, site 120 EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: Og' g DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. SCALE: DATE: Winchester, Virginia 22601 E: Telephone (540)662-5792 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA-100.0' 3/5/09 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 SHEET: ENGINEERS Email office@pointerlewis.com EXHIBIT 2 IMPACT ANALYSIS PATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • Construct an additional southbound lane from the proposed entrance on Custer Avenue to Millwood Pike. This lane will serve as a right turn lane for south bound traffic. • Restripe the pavement on Custer Avenue at the intersection to delineate a right turn lane, and a combined through -left turn lane. • The residents from the adjacent neighborhoods have expressed concern that the eastbound left turn lane is inadequate at times to provide vehicle storage. Potentially, this site could be developed before the Governors Hill project. Therefore, the Proffer Statement contains a commitment to increase the storage capacity of the left turn lane if required. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements will be constructed generally along the Route 50 frontage of the site. Pedestrian facilities will be constructed to link Pembridge Avenue with Route 50. Final design of these improvements will conform to the standards and requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation and Frederick County. Please refer to the Proffer Statement. During the review of the TIA, concern has been raised that the U-turn movement at the Ryco Lane intersection with Route 50 may have significant impacts on westbound and eastbound traffic. Specifically, the concerns are 1) that traffic exiting the site will not be able to cross the westbound lanes of Route 50 safely to get to a position to make the U- turn to head eastbound, and 2) that the U-turn movement will create conflict with the eastbound traffic. The traffic engineer has evaluated the movement of vehicles which exit the site heading westbound and crossing both lanes to enter the left turn lane and has determined that this movement is functional. This evaluation has been attached to the end of the TIA in Section 7. The TIA states that at design year 2020, the peak hour U-turn movement at Ryco Lane is 32 VPH. The impact of these U-turn movements is mitigated by the existence of the center turn lane in Route 50 which provides protection for the vehicles and the upstream traffic signal which will provide gaps in the eastbound traffic into which these vehicles may make the U-turn movement. D. SEWAGE CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County Sewer and Water Service Area. The development would be serviced by the county sewer system. The location of the existing sewer lines is shown on Exhibit 3 on the following page. 5 tit w v w o b ? U L,J m '' O LLJ KIN CSS DRIVE D ARgY 00 DRIVE b R RT BO p ST ANE�Y D `l � b o D NEGAL v LOUR RI o z O FLAN AGAN D PEMgRIDGE D,R / � COURT o `` 8 8 J�Q�. � STREET 8� CO << 8 0 �b S � y o>4f) O� 0 M oCOI O NO ]Nv�nl PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. PROJECT: SURVEY: C.L: NA NA SANITARY SEWER EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 P—L 0812002 Winchester, Virginia 22601 DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. SCALE: DATE: Telephone (540)662-5792 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 1 =600.0' 3/5/09 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 SHEET: ENGINEERS Email office®painterlewis.com EXHIBIT 3 • • IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • E. WATER SUPPLY The site is inside the limits of the Frederick County Sewer and Water Service Area. The development would be serviced by the county water system. The location of the existing water lines is shown on Exhibit 4 on the following page. F. DRAINAGE According to Frederick County topographic mapping and the Frederick County Soil Survey this site has gentle slopes ranging from 2 percent to 25 percent. Storm water runoff generally toward the Route 50 right of way from west to east and passes under Custer Avenue in a culvert. With the development of this site a storm water management system would be implemented to control any added flow created by the increased impervious areas. G. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES The nearest citizens' trash facility is located at the landfill on Sulphur Springs Road approximately two mile north and east of the site. In general, the collection of solid waste from the proposed commercial development will be accomplished by a private hauler. It is estimated that the development will generate approximately 100 pounds of issolid waste per acre per day that will be transported to the landfill. Tipping fees are currently $45 per ton for commercial haulers. No additional solid waste disposal facilities will be required for the proposed development. It is estimated that $2,280 in tipping fees will be paid to dispose of 50 tons of solid waste annually. H. HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES This site does not contain any historic or "potentially significant" historic structures as listed in The Rural Landmarks Survey Report of Frederick County. There are several "potentially significant sites" that lie within a mile of the site. The Rural Landmarks Survey Report lists several other structures within approximately one mile of the site as shown on Exhibit 5. A copy of the Civil War Battlefields and Sites map has been included on the following pages. The subject parcels do not lie on any Civil War Battlefield sites. I. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT MODEL The Frederick County Development Impact Model (D.I.M.) is utilized primarily for 4P residential rezoning requests. It is anticipated that the capital facilities impacts of t�t 1� a ARgY ORNE �. DR �T HBO �� � Q � ST ANELY 4z- \ �ba C(- z0 DONEOAL CDt~n COURT O w FLANACAN ORN o m � OR R U T 9 a TREET g„ Q 00 v O CO Cb „8 (b Q N 0)Kl_ AZ \ IT- Q U Z of CO o � NO ]Nbini / l SURVEY: c.1.: PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. PROJECT: DRAWN NA NA 817 Cedor Creek Grade, Site 120 WATER DISTRIBUTION EXHIBIT PLBY: 0812002 Winchester, Virginia 22601 DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. SCALE: DATE: Telephone (540)662-5792 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA "�=100 ° 3/5/09 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 SHEET: ENGINEERS Email off ice@pointerlewis.com EXHIBIT 4 • 0 i �I CIVIL V1F.R SITES el , Frederlcl< County Planning S DeveloJ P" � lJinehcster, �/Irgir:o Civil War Battle °el is and Sites PS Shcllanr oafl Valley Civil War Si-CCS Stztdj:) (As Defined by the N j 12-10-97 • 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • commercial and industrial rezoning requests are ultimately fiscally positive to the County by policy. Accordingly, the D.I.M. does not apply a fiscal impact to commercial rezoning. EMERGENCY SERVICES Police protection is provided by the Frederick County Sheriff's Department. The nearest fire and rescue facility is the Millwood Station Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company located on Costello Drive. No additional fire and rescue facilities will be required for the area proposed to be rezoned. The Frederick County Capital Facilities Impact Model calculates that there will not be any projected capital cost for emergency service facilities attributable to this development. The owner recognizes the importance of emergency services, and proposes to proffer a monetary contribution to the local emergency responder. See the attached Proffer Statement. PARKS AND RECREATION There are typically no impacts on Parks and Recreation facilities associated with rezoning to a commercial use. J. LOT CONSOLIDATION • Exhibit 6 on the following page shows the total site proposed for rezoning in a consolidated form. Consolidation will eliminate interior lot lines. Access easements will be created to preserve access to the adjacent parcels. K. HOA MEETING RESULTS A meeting with members of Pembridge Heights and Raven Wing home owners associations took place on May 28, 2009 at the home of Ralph and Elyse Pritchett. Pembridge Heights owners included the Pritchetts, Adrienne Hayes, and James Davern. Raven Wing owners included Howard Miller, James Oakes, Frank Lucostic, Pat Meyer, and Henry Noble. The meeting resulted in a number of concerns that can be categorized as concerns associated with existing conditions and concerns associated with conditions which would arise with a change in the zoning. CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS Traffic at the intersection of Custer Avenue and Route 50 is currently a concern. Discussion at the meeting resulted in the identification of four specific deficiencies associated with the intersection: 1) The turn signal cycle for the southbound lane on Custer Avenue seems to be too 0 short to allow a sufficient number of vehicles through the intersection per cycle. 7 PEMBRIDGE AVENUE Y/ / yy 601i_ _ PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone (540)662-5792 CONSULTING Facsimile (540)662-5793 ENGINEERS Email office@painterlewis.com PROJECT: LOT CONSOLIDATION EXHIBIT DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. FREDERICK COUNTY, ARGINIA SURVEY: C. NA NA DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: P—L 0812002 SCALE: DATE: 1"-100.0' 6/1/09 SHEET: I EXHIBIT 6 0 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • 2) The southbound lane on Custer Avenue in the area of the intersection with Route 50 is in need of pavement repair. 3) A right turn lane should be added to Custer Avenue southbound to allow continuous right turn movement. 4) The vehicle storage area for left turns on Route 50 eastbound is not adequate. • The applicant will address concerns 1, 2, and 3 by a commitment to add a right turn lane northbound on Custer Avenue. This will result in a repair of the existing pavement and allow more vehicles to pass through the intersection during each signal cycle. • As pointed out in the Traffic Impact Analysis, the Governors Hill project has already committed to increase the vehicle storage capacity of the left turn lane east bound on Route 50. However, the applicant will commit to providing this improvement, and therefore address concern 4, in the case when the subject property is developed before the Governors Hill project. Please refer to the Proffer Statement in Section 7. CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH A CHANGE TO 82 ZONING Discussion at the meeting resulted in the identification of nine specific concerns associated with the proposed zoning change. • 1) If a "destination use", such as a fast food restaurant, is developed on the site, there will be an unacceptable increase in traffic from the Senseny Road area associated with local trips. 2) A "white table cloth" restaurant is an acceptable use. A fast food or high turnover restaurant with drive -through service will be a source of noise, odors, and trash. 3) A commercial establishment will result in light glare impacting the residential neighborhood. 4) Freestanding signs may be illuminated to the point that the glare is offensive. 5) New buildings should be constructed from materials which are attractive and compatible with the adjacent residential uses. 6) The height of new buildings should be limited to decrease impacts on the adjacent residential uses. 7) Existing vegetation along the site perimeter should be preserved if possible. 8) Automobile sales establishments with outdoor sales areas should be eliminated as potential uses. 9) Lodging establishments with outdoor swimming pools should be eliminated as potential uses. • The applicant will address concerns 1 and 2 by prohibiting the site from being used for fast food or high turnover restaurants with drive -through service. • Additional uses deem incompatible will be prohibited. 0 0 IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. • Concern 3 is already regulated under the current guidelines in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. To further ensure against excessive glare, the applicant will restrict parking lot pole lights to 18' total, maximum height as measured from the ground surface. Wall mounted lights will be shielded to result in downcast lighting only and limited in their height above the ground surface. • The applicant will address concern 4 by ensuring that lighting sources for free standing signs shall be shielded, external, and directed only at the sign itself. Internal illumination of the free standing signs is acceptable only if the sign letters or characters themselves, not the background, are illuminated. • The applicant will address concern 5 by ensuring that compatible materials will be used in the external finishes of buildings. Multiple buildings will be required to exhibit a common architectural appearance. Roof top mechanical units will be screened from the view of the adjacent residential uses. • The applicant will address concern 6 by eliminating the height exception for hotels and office buildings as currently allowed in Section 165-24-B-(6) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. • The applicant will address concern 7 by establishing a "non -disturbance area" within the buffer adjacent to the residential uses where it is practical to preserve existing vegetation. • The applicant will address concern 8 by prohibiting the site from being used for automotive dealers with outdoor display areas and gasoline service stations. • • No prohibition on outdoor swimming pools has been added to the proffer statement. Outdoor pools would typically be associated with public lodging facilities. These facilities impose hours of operation to insure that the guests are not disturbed from their sleep. These types of pools generally seem to experience limited usage. Please refer to the Proffer Statement in Section 7. N • � Traffic Impact Analysis submitted as a separate document • • • is 9 , 3, 2Ut!9 John C. Lewis Painter -Lewis, P.L C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Wincht-tPr, VA 22601 Mr. Lewis. .1; Holdinl-,, MilWiA ' Frederick Cu, VA As requostPd I am pr v ling information to answer thi :Pms of ct iised in review comments issued by Gr Hoffman of VOOT, and John I' . op of Frederick Co. Planning. VDOT Comment (Greg Hoffman) - How will U-Turns in the gore area be controlled by west bound traffic leaving your site? This is a potentially dangerous situation which needs to be addressed. The proposed entiar wo Millwl-nd F will for(,, vehi, dPsir to travP. P•3• t about 00 feet downstrr -im. An propo•od ozu, entrance. i 1 e% �r eompanit B IPft turn lane _ co f t aforemerI onpri U turn will be s pi 'ed turn lane' • mak J-Cu•t-. Onc, it m also have the beni t of an ul -earn trash( traffic flow sufficient for the L turn to b. n• d a Rir.l.t in -Right out connection. This J Pike to first trd. I west and ma U turn I I,,ft i lane i• n lilac, t • .. ''r "'^ a n . , oar t , F,. Royal Pike. A ,hr. flit oy :> t is �chLWed i,-ft It turn me, drivers makinp j U-tu II the i i r inr •, :Itdt w-ii , a Si gaps in the flished. Frederick County Planning Comment (John Bishop) — If right in — right out is allowed on Route 50, the distance to the next crossover will need to be analyzed for weaving risks (if it is too near to the entrance) and potential improvements. The distance fr( ..: I_. .)osed .,, '.r. tl in;tredm por t when n...urat )ns anu p- -n rn •, . n, U trail' 'urt . fr, i vt i the WR:ant f N' ' - h i :!"OL nes to enter nc� 1. 1' t •rr • • 0 Mr. Joh Pwis July 13, 2009 Page 2 Highway Capacity Manual refers to this mar.:..eras a 'type t_ vi Configuration. 1 .vo 5rdrd Weave. This weave was evaluatt J two v. jys w:tl • t• ` %A n, Its: Synchro softwa • prescribed by VUOT for the Tr +'iu Im: t ' tudy of this project inc tr ; an animation tool that displays the actual mod d traff - • editions. This animation was rPviPwed for the Design Year 2020 PM and Saturday Peak Hour ndit ins, to determine if the wea rea would cause unacceptable delays or blockins: of traffic.. No st, n , vents were ob . d. The upstream traffic. Signal at the intersemon of Pr Frederick Driv• . ,d Millwood Pike provided gaps in the westbound traffic stream that allow,,cl for the weave movement to be accomplished with minimal through traffic. E Method ' ii .•Iw , rep,. n. -, •. ,r ' , •., , A Weave Analysis was p,.-formed for tF•• t' Vl Pt•.ik Hour .:. th, Dt ;i: sin th ; condition morl,•I•, the highest traftrc volumes on the 1h 3 thrc la 1. - the xit point of tl to the ! innin the left to''. 3ne %ti,j:, r •c >t v ti. . rdditr �f ft turn st, •r taking vehi .o the point f thi it his. ,, 31y,,15 reported a Wc•.3vE Service of B for the studied st•;;ment ntr_3ched FILM works:heetj. Should you need any additional infor )n, ple,- do not hesitate to contact me. Attachm Sincef,,ly, STn •. ! : NGINEERING, P ., , l i C v, • L S ;i, and Managrr r: .i 0 J� 4� M;p`"oad Pike m� Q Custer Or 0 °01 781 e- c�c� C(C) ti Vr 17 0 x U �J 4 0 V C Q PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE Figure 7 Existing 2009 Lane Geometq, and Level of Service Ti-affic Impact Study for RAIIJ Holdings Development r7 • tt"11 it it tilt I it it 1-1111111111111, 1111 ill m a J a Mi�hybotl p'ke .? Q e(q J y p m O` Custer Dr �o 781 ti D(C) C(C) ti Vr 17 0 G J U V C a PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE Figure 14 2014 Build Out Lane Geometry and Levels of Service Ti-affic Impact Study for DjW Holdings Development �I to CI ^� 1l4Llll ,O J J Q, fvJil/typo? Pike Construct right turn lane from entrance to Millwood Pike. B�q� Y � grgJ r U S/7-E a m °It Custer or v� 65, 781 e� C(C) ti Vr 17 a s G tl U C Q PM Peak Hour(Saturday Peak Hour) NOT TO SCALE Figure 16 2014 w/ Improvements Lane Geometry and Levels of Service Traffic Impact Study for DJ` Holdings Development 0 1C � 0 � 0 • FREEWAY WEAVING WORKSHEET (General Information Jsite Information St( .ve F F . West B Ip : Sti .Vf _r V. F or F t . Inputs— y N 1 i tune aoc Irr r Conversions to pcih Under Base Conditions — I � I, I •.. I� I Weaving and Non -Weaving Speeds JV - I Ix tWeavinq Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service, and_9a pacity_ INotcs • • N LA. OW' IONAS A. UWtNAN, P.C. •xin�'„urzx vuaw� • CD 0 050023688 THIS DEED, made and dated this lc7 TN day of n� 7-0.6t5Q , 2005, by and between ZUCKERMAN ENTERPRISES INC., A Virginia Corporation, party of the first part, hereinafter called the GRANTOR, and D M J HOLDINGS LLC, A Virginia Limited Liability Company, party of the second part, hereinafter called the GRANTEE. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby grant and convey with General Warranty of Title and English Covenants of Title unto the Grantee, in fee simple, its undivided one-half interest in the following described property and appurtenances thereto belonging Parcel One All of that certain lot or parcel of land, together with all rights, privileges, and appurtenances thereto belonging, lying and being situate along the Northern side of U S Highway No. 50, about one mile East of Winchester, in Shawnee Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, fronting on said highway a distance of 100 feet and extending back Northward a uniform width a distance of 300 feet and being designated as Tax Map Parcel 64A-4-I6, and further designated as Lot No. 16 on the plat of Asa J. Rosenberger Lots, which plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, m Deed Book 203 at Page 537. This is the same parcel an undivided one-half interest in which was conveyed to C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc. by Deed dated 14 November 1975 from Zuckerman Company, Inc., of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 451 at Page 655 Parcel Two All of that certain lot or parcel of land, together with all rights, privileges, and appurtenances thereto belongmg, lying and being situate along the Northern side of U.S. Highway No. 50, about one mile East of Winchester, in Shawnee Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, and being designated as Tax Map Parcel 64A-4-17, and further designated as Lot No 17 on the plat of Asa J Rosenberger Lots, which plat is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 203 at Page 537 This is 0 0 • uw IONAS A iA TMA4. P.0 R'�4�lliSTEl VIIaNA 0 0 0 the same parcel an undivided one-half interest in which was conveyed to C & S Steel & Fabricating, Inc. by Deed dated 14 November 1975 from Zuckerman Company, Inc , of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 451 at Page 655 Parcel Three All of that certain lot or parcel of land, together with all rights, privileges, and appurtenances thereto belonging, lying and being situate along the Northern side of U.S Highway No. 50, about one mile East of Winchester, in Shawnee Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, and being designated as Tax Map Parcel 64A-4-16A. This is the same parcel which was conveyed to Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. and Charles Zuckerman and Son, Inc. by Deed dated 27 October 1988 from the Commonwealth of Virginia acting by and through the Comtonwealth Transportation Commissioner, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County in Deed Book 700 at Page 225 C & S Steel & Fabricatmg, Inc. changed its name to Charles Zuckerman & Son, Inc., which changed its name to Winchester Metals, Inc Zuckerman Company, Inc. changed its name to Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc Reference is here made to the aforesaid instruments and the attachments and the references therein contained for a further and more particular description of the property hereby conveyed. This conveyance is made subject to all easements, rights of way and restrictions of record affecting the subject property Except as noted above, the Grantor covenants that it has the right to convey to the Grantee; that the Grantee shall have quiet and peaceable possession of the said property, free and clear from all liens and encumbrances; and it will grant such further assurances of title as may be requisite IP7 ,UT'1179ESS W1I: PX0F, Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc , has caused this Deed to be executed by its President, Richard E. Williams, all pursuant to a duly adopted resolution of the Board of Directors of Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc , who warrant that nothing in the Articles 0 • • tAw cmu 10MASA LADLInIAKPC KY..C.IcrtEa VitGutl♦ CD CD C1 of Incorporation or Bylaws of Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. prohibits the conveyance of this property by its President in this manner: Zuckerman Enterprises, Inc. By: CJ�--�. P�'YJi (SEAL) Richard E. Williams, President STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF WINCIIESTER, To -wit: I, Janet M. Puffinberger, a Notary Public in and for the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Richard E. Williams, whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed, dated the 1a ry day of )� 2005, has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same m my State aforesaid. Given under my hand this 1�� day of a e -i-aA&-g-- 2005 • My Commission expires November 30, 2006 (�� No tag Pn c UFF/N PO 9to' O �i 9 2 MY Co ¢ = Q COMMISSION ; 2 3 EXPIRES 2� 1 1 /30/06VIo ThtRs ntstrument oEfnwriltmg was producedICK COUNTY, tome on 1 '�o AL TNtO� �, /Q_�a• as at S2) ah and -111 certificate of acknowledgement thereto annexed was admitted to record T I,ulwsed by Sec 58 1.802 of have been paid. ifassessable �GG.t 'Clerk E w DO6QPQ25 THIS DEED, Made this 27th day of October, 1988, by and between the COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, acting by and thrdugh the Commonwealth Transporta- tion Commissioner, Grantor, and ZUCdRMK' ENTERPRISES, INC. AND C14ARLES ZUCKERMAN AND SON, INC., Grantees; WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property was ac- quired in conjunction with the State Highway System, and WHEREAS, said property has been deemed no longer necessary for this purpose, and WHEREAS, accordingly, this conveyance was authorized in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1-149 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, at a meeting of the Commonwealth Transportation Board held on i October 26, 1988, by a resolution duly adopted and recorded in the minutes of the said meeting. f NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of SIX THOUSAND, 1 SEVEN HUNDRED TWEMTI DOLLARS ($6,720.00), receipt of which is hereby acknowl- edged, and the affidavit Of the Grantees that they are the owners of the adjacent property and that the adjacent property is free from liens and/or duds of trust, the Grantor does hereby release, remise and quitclaim unto the Grantees the hereinafter described lot or parcel of land, all of which lies in Shawnee Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia; Being as shown on Sheet 4 of the plans for Routes 17 and 50, State Highway Project 0017-034-101, RW-201, and lying north of and adjacent to the north revised proposed right of way line (10/18/88) of Route 17, from the lands of the Commonwealth at a point approximately 30 feet left of approximate Station 60+08 (survey and WSL centerline) to the lands of the Commonwealth at a point approximately 30 feet left of approximate Station 61+15 (survey and WaL centerline), containing 0.04 acre, more or less, land. For a more particular description of the land herein conveyed, reference is made to the photocopy of said Sheet 4, showing outlined in RED the said land, which photocopy is hereto attached as a part of this conveyance and Is to be recorded simultaneously herewith in the State Highway Plat Book. It is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto, that this conveyance is subject to any right, privilege, or easement encumbering the herein described land, whether located above, upon, or under the surface, either presently in use or of record. i 8X'7p0?G.22B IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Conreonwealth of Virginia, acting by and through Ray 0. Pethtel, Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, has caused this deed to be executed in her name as of the day, month, and year first above I written. COIMiGHNEALTH OF VIRGINIA A8y (SEAL) Comnonw r Ith Tra I portati6n7ommissioner COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA City of Richmond, To -Wit, a Notary Public in and for the State of Virginia at Large, do certify that Ray 0. Pethtel, Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, whose name is signed to the foregoing writing bearing date on the 27th day of October, 1988, has acknowledged the same before me. My commission expires 1641.0 " 1 [4, / U.? Given under my hand this /i/Z4 day of '4/0aeir 2"'- 1988. Notary c VMjtitA: MDEMCK COUNTY, SCT. to m on the Th�wlthcetti of was __Y 19 rL�� anate of acknowledgment thereto annexed WAS admitt to record. Tax imposed by Sao. 5ti-84.1 d Sand 58.54 haw been paki , it asWVtWa. -2- I 9 VEIRIE STAMPS . 55 {' (-,CELLED {f �#{,{FittNt;fif{Hf -,tit#if • rto of Virginia, .nty of Frederick, To-'rVit: • I, Nancy W. Glover, a notary public in and for ti,e County of rederick, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that Susan J. Tokos, whose name rsignod to the foregoing and annexed writing, boa,ring date the 17th day of January, 48, has personally appeared before me in my County aforesaid and acknowledged the same-,. b,y commission expires May 19, 1949. i Given under my hand this 17th day of January, 1948. i NANCY W. GLJVER Notary Public SUSAN J. TOKES (SEAL) fl TIRGINIA I MDERICK COUNTY, (SCT,) This instrument of writing was produced to me on the 17th day of Jan. 1948 at 4:25 P. M. and with certificate of att►owledgment thareto annexed was I idmitted to record. ,CLERK It#iHN}#{HfiF;FiH}##iHhiiFi HF;F#iHHHF i 1153 dSA L. ROSENBERGER If !TO:: :: :: PLAT if �Exd. J,qN. ##{Fif iFiti},}iF-7f#iFiFif ififif****itifiFiiiF a 7 r 9 y 8 The undersigned, Asa L. Rosenberger, widowar, being the owner of the hereinafter described land lying and being situate along the Northern side of :,_ �_..� ,.v ��a r;t.. of Wi-nchester; in Shawnee District,r,,A1 U. S. highway No. 50 auout ono i-a—.. __ Frederick County, Virginia, said land being a portion of that curtain larger tract or I parcel of land which was conveyed to the said Asa L. Rosenberger by Nannie B. Chamberlin-, and husband, by deed dated Ilarch 15, 1909, and of record in the Clerk's Office of the j Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book No. 130, page 189, do hereby �G that the land embraced within the annexed plat has boon sub-dividod into lots, 1 T ' `�- certify the dimensions and areas of which are accurately shown on said plat; that said sub- division and plat has been made with the full and free consent,• -and desire of the under-' I i (signed, and this certificate together with said plat, which by this reference id in i �corporated in this instrument, is submitted to the Clark of the Circuit Court of -,Frederick County, Virginia, for recordation pursuant to tiro provisions of Soctions i I5217-18 of the Code of Virginia. i I It is expressly stipulated that the lots included in said sub - )division shall be sold and remain subjuct to the following restrictive conditions ; i ring with the land. which are hereby declared to be covenants real runti i Lots Nos. 2, 3 • 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, arA 16 shall be sold and remain subject to the following oendi-tions: • I (1) That said lots shall 'be used only for residential purposee (2) That said lots shall not 'be sold or leased to , nor the ,a possession thereof in any manner transferred to any person or persons other than morebe of the Caucasian Race. (3) That no dwelling or other building shall be erected neare` than 75 feet to the Northern boundary of U. S. Highway No. 50. (4) That no privy or outside toilet may be erected, or mnin- itained thereon. (5).That all sewage disposal must be by means of septic tan!q and drainage approved by the Common Council of the City of Winchester, Virginia. I That lots Nos. 1, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 shall be sold and remain subject to the following conditions; (1) Said lots shall be used only for residential purposes, or I for restricted commercial purposes, such as gasoline filing station, cabin camp, i restaurant, store, or business of a like nature. G I (2) That said lots shall not be sold or leased to, nor the possession thereof in any Manner transferred to any person or persons other than membel • I of the Caucasian Race, i (3) That no'privy or outside toilet may be erected, or main- tained thereon. (4) That all sewage disposal must be by means of-aeptic tanks' and drainage approved by the Common Council of.tho City of Winchester, Virginia. Given under my hand and seal this 17th day of January, 1948. ASA L. ROSENBERGER (SEAL) State of Virginia County of Frederick, to -wit: I, Virginia Ritter, a notary public in and for the County of Frederick, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that -Ana L. Rosenberger, whoae name is signed to the foregoing writing bearing date of January 17, 1948, has personal] appearod before me in my county aforesaid, and acknowledged the same. Given under myhand this 17th day of January, 1948. 1yy commiseion expires March 24, 1948. VIRGINIA RITTER. 0 J N-otai,y-Friiblic o E /Q oS EN ER GER Fq em Q\ O 'Ro POSGo S°�EJITRAAIcf- je FRANK ra FipRM pn� 4 MlLLE1Z m Z 3S. g / o /oo /ao /oo N 's 7 , w 15 ¢ �°o; JOo / /Oo /oo /00 /°o /oo /oo / O N o 1°° A Zlr V� O ! Y 6 ¢ /oo /oo /oo /00 636 /05. 3 ro .3 ° Z3 { a 7 3 9 °`� /S /6 18 13 E o I 6=- 12Z 100 b 10 oo G'r o 94.7 r /oo Ioo - r Ao / S i4 00 r. y'C S7 <C boa /00 /oo /oo /o0 6�i ro S ��I 1, ROS£NGERSER �� (j'S O NC 1 H W A O 1 S. H G '„ o r / '-9,S9'o %Fq• FT 2 16 30 0co CP' P l7 3Z,66 D ig zo, 66.i �Sd L L O 7- S O F •�. C m + c G E R •-+ .Zp 2-0 382..f .. .. THE 7- CS/QE C) (.%, (n �•i8 o UT / MILE S NlcN 2� �-3 %' 000 � •• fZT OF E�9S r OF �/.//N FA F'9RM Fr2orl ' N 31, JGz.S-• DZED Book /3o A/ANNIE B. ✓No. W. CHAMBEp_LA/N o^> PR GE /8g SurvE ed ocToat� 30 /�47 6� E. � :J co IJ G c o D 1_ J 0 U � E U H H H �= I U 0 0 0 7563-8204 EBY/cmi • 060021923 0 CD C_ 1 CA THIS DEED, made and dated this 2211D day of November, 2006 by and between SAMUEL N. WHITACRE and JOANNE V. WJIITACRE, husband and wife, LEE S. WHITACRE and LEIGH ANNE WHITACRE, husband and wife, and ,TAMES L. LONGERBEAM and SHELDA W. LONGERBEAM, husband and wife, hereinafter called the Grantors, and DMJ HOLDINGS, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company, hereinafter called the Grantee. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid and other valuable consideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Grantors do grant and convey, with General Warranty and with English Covenants of Title, unto the Grantee, in fee simple, together with all rights, rights of way, privileges improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto belonging, all of the following realty: All of those three (3) tracts or parcels of land lying and being situate along the northern side of the old U. S. Highway No. 50 about one mile cast of Winchester in Shawnee Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia as follows: Tract One: That certain lot or parcel of land fronting on said road a distance of 100 feet and extending back northward a uniform width a distance of 283.5 feet along its western side and 249.8 feet along its eastern side, with a width of 105.3 feet in the rear, and being the same land identified as lot No. 18 on the plat of the Asa L. Rosenberger lots, which is of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 203, at Page 537, et seq. Tract Two: That certain lot or parcel of land fronting a distance of 100 feet on the northern side of the Old located of U. S. Highway No. 50, and extending back northward a distance of 249.8 feet along its western side and 216 feet along its eastern side, with a width of 105.3 feet in the rear, and being the same land identified as lot No. 19 on the plat of the Asa L. Rosenberger lots, which is of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 203, at Page 537, et seq. r • 0 • • • CD CD r_ n Tract Three: That certain lot or parcel of land being the western portion of o Lot No. 20 on the plat of the Lots of Asa L. Rosenberger, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office, said lot fronts 50 feet on the north side of old U. S. Highway No. 50, and extends in a northerly direction contiguous to the eastern boundary of Lot 19 on said plat for a distance of 216 feet with a width in the rear of 50.2 feet. AND BEING the same property conveyed to the Grantors herein by Deed dated September 15, 1993 of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, in Deed Book 805, at Page 163. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid instruments and the reference therein contained for a more particular description of the property hereby conveyed. This conveyance is made subject to all legally enforceable restrictive covenants and casements of record affecting the aforesaid realty. The Grantors do hereby covenant that they have the right to convey to the Grantee; that the Grantee sliall have quiet and peaceable possession of the said property, free from all liens and encumbrances; and they will grant such further assurances of title as may be requisite. WITNESS the following signature and seal: Z�2;_,U_a �, 1�—(SI3AL) SAMUELN. WHITACRE, ,-a / �r CAL c (SEAL) �JOA T � (SEAL) LEE S. HITAC a (SEAL) (SEAL) /jI_AMES L. LONGERBEAM (SEAT,) SHELDA W. LONGERBEAM 0 E • • 0, 0 0 STATE OF VIRGINIA crn COUNTY OF FREDERICK, To -wit: I, Cathy M. Jewell, a Notary Public in and for the State and jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that Samuel N. Whitace and Joanne V. Whitacre, whose names are signed to the foregoing Deed, dated this 22"d day of November, 2006 have personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this 22"d day of November, 2006. My commission expires: 12/31/08� Notary blv �=,( � .� • � "emu •,'� � STATE OF VIRGINIA i ' • `� rt a COUNTY OF I-REDERICK, 'I'o-wit: 4 , >• I, Cathy M. Jewell, a Notary Public in and for the State and jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that Lee S. Whitace and Leigh Arnie Whitacre, whose names are signed to the foregoing Deed, dated this 22"d day of November, 2006 have personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this 22"d day of November, 2006. My commission expires: 12/31/08. Notary Pu is C'•4 •'tom { J. iL 3 0 �J 6'' 0 0 cn STATE OF VIRGfMA CD COUNTY OF FREDERICK, To -wit: I, Cathy M. Jewell, a Notary Public in and for the State and jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that James L. Longerbeam and Shelda W. Longerbeam, whose names are signed to the foregoing Deed, dated this 22nd day of November, 2006 have personally appeared before the and acknowledged the same in my State and jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this 22"d day of November, 2006. My commission expires: 12/31/08. Notary Pub _t. 0, v' VIRGINIA: FREDERICK COUNTY.SCF. This instrument otwritim, was produced to me on and with ca tilirate arkno%k led�rrncm thereto annexed was admitted to record. l';ix imposed by Sec. 58.1-802 of S 3so• 00 , and 58.1-801 have been paid, if assessable. 4de4 ,Ck* 4 a 0 9 u �n-j I BK805Ps0163 THIS D$ED made and dated this_ day of J_* 1993, by and between PRENITH L. BARTLEY, EXECUTOR, Executor under the Will of Arnold J. Bartley, Sr., deceased, Grantor and party of the first part, PRENITH L. BARTLEY, individually, NORIS B. WILSON, BRACE A. BARNETT, LYNN E. WILSON, single, LORI WILSON DOUGLAS and LINDA B. JOHNSON, d, hQirg, parties of the second part; SAMUEL N. WHITACRE and ° m � 0 (fy • JOANNE V. WHITACRE, his wife, parties of the third part, and h m u LEg S. WHITACRE and LEIGH ANNE WHITACRE, his wife, parties of the fourth part, and JADES L. IANGERBEAH and SHELDA W. Z � d L0HOERBEAM, his wife, parties of the filth part; and A. U CAROLE BARTLEY, LORIS E. WILsoll, JOYCE BARNETT, THOMAS P. DOU6LaS and GE012GS C. JOHNSON, spouses, parties of the sixth part. y7FEPJ�AS, Arnold J. Bartley and Dolly G. Bartley, his wife, were the owners of the three (3) parcels conveyed herein with aurvivorship and Dolly G. Bartley pred ceaued her hunpand vesting lull title in such parcels in Arnold J. Bartley; and WHEREAS, Arnold J. Barrtley died testate on July 24, 1991, seized and possessed of the hereinafter described tracts crr parcels of land, and by the terms of hie Will recorded in the Office of the Clsrk of the Circuit Court of Prederiok County, Virginia in Will Book 103., at Pago 1159 appointed Prenith L. Bartley as Executor with authority to { sell such land. The said Prenith L. Bartley, party of the i i i • first part has duly'qualified as Executor under the terms of !1 I 1 lU1fOtYlIOIR�M II � MAN Ar7011 M AY W ' r WYt11 KtMSTMtr r�Nu1611f1. VIR6i1NA I,M1 { U!" 0 • p BK805PGO 164 the Will as evidenced by the cortifieate recorded in the aforesaid Clerks office in Will Book 101, at Page 1166. WHxREAB, under the terms of said Will, all the rest, residue and remainder of the Estate of Arnold J. Bartley, Sr., deceased, including the lot conveyed herein, was devised to his children, Prenith L. Bartley and Noris B. Wilson; and his grandchildren, Bruce A. Barnett, Lynn E. Wilson, single, Lori Wilson Douglas and Linda B. Johnson. NOW, THMFoRE, in consideration of the sum of Ono Hundred Thirty -Five Thousand Dollars ($135,000.00) cash in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by the party of the first part, the said party of the first part does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey, with Special Warranty of title, unto the said Samuel H. Whitacre and Jo Anne: V. Whitacre, his wife, parties of the third part, a one-third 41/3) undivided interest to be hold as tenants in common with the parties of the fourth part and parties of the fifth part, said one-third (1/3) undivided interest being held between them` as tenants by the entirety with right of survivorship; to Lee S. Whitacre and Leigh Anne Whitacre, his wife, parties of the fourth parr, a one-third (1/3) undivided interest to be held as tenants in common with the parties of the third part and parties of the fifth part, said one-third (1/3) undivided interest being held between them as tenants by the entirety with survivorship; and to James L. Longexbeam and Sheld, W. Longerbeam, his wife, parties of the fifth 'part, a one-third (2/3) undivided interest to be held as 1 KtMIY, Tq�pGlCr(JIIT011 • OlAtt ATTdW V t AT L" it t0UT11 RiMT tiMtT WYIp,>RI{R, V P,GWIA 2'W1 r� L 8NO05PGG 165 the parties of the third part and parties of the fourth part, said one-third (1/3) undivided interest being held between then as tenants by the entirety with survivorship as at common law, together with all rights, rights of way, privileges, improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto belonging, all of the following realty: All of those t;,,rQ s (3) tracts or parcels of land lying and being situate along the northern side of the old U.S. Highway No. 5o about one mile Magisterial i east of Winchester in Shawnee District, Frederick County, Virginia am follows: TRACT ONE: That certain lot or parcel fronting feet and extending on said road a distance of 100 back northward a uniform width a distancE of 283.5 feet along its western side, and 249.8 feet along its eastern side, with a width of 105.3 land feet in the rear, and being tho came Identified as Lot No. 18 on the plat of the Asa in record in the L. AosAnbergeer Lots, which of clerk's office of the Circuit court o: Frederick County, Virginia, in Dead Book 203, at Page 537- This is the same real property conveyed 38-39. to A. J. Bartley and Dolly G. Bartley, his wife, by ,deed dated parch 18, 1954 of record in the aforesaid Clerk's office in Deed Book 231, at 1. Page 274. TRACT TKO: That certain lot or parcel fronting a distance of 100 feet on the northern aide of the old location of U. S. Highway No. 50, and extending back northward a distance of 249.8 feet along its western side, and 216 feet along its eastern side, with a width of 205.3 feet in the rear, and being the name land identified and j� designated as Lot No. 19 on the plat of the Asa L. Rosenberger Lots, which is of record as afore- said. This is the same real property conveyed �i to Arnold J. Bartley and Dolly G. Bartley, his wife, by deed dared January 24, 1951 of ?record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 217, at Page 431. 3 TRACT THREE: All of that certain lot or parcel being the western portion of Lot No. 20 on the j plat of theloL-e of Asa L. Rosonberger, of record • es aforesaid, said lot frame 50 feet on the north side of old U.B. Highway No. 50 and extends 1 in,a northerly direction contiguous to the t i t iWIY, YXq*" rQq e�w A7,omm AT LAW 3@90v M XAMT (TeetT . 1TWLVWMk1A 32M BK805PGO166, eastern id plat for a distance of boundary feat with a Of Lot 19 on a width in the rear of 50.2 feet. This is the same real property conveyed to Arnold J. Bartley and Dolly G. Bartley, his wife, by deed dated septwaber 1, 1967 of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 336, at Page 235. The parries of sixth part, A. Carole Bartley, Loris E. Wilson, Joyce Barnett, Thomas P. Douglas and George C. Johnson, spouses of the heirs herein, as evidenced by their signature hereto, joins in this instrument to convey all of their right, title and interest, including, but not limited to marital rights, in and to the property described herein. This conveyance is made, however, subject to all legally enforceable restrictive covQnants and easements of record affecting the aforesaid realty. WITNESS the following signature and seals ISM) EtiITB L. BA4a"V1 Ind vidually and t!s Exeoutoof Arnold J. Bartley, Sr. `%t 4,. lc%Ia•'J (SEAT,) NORIS B WILSON ( SEAL) BRUCE A. BARNETT II 1 80j"Y. T1�IOac>rOFTOM CLAN f 9011Tf1 M tiM" ■W60KMTIM,YM 0MtA 2 MI (SEAL) (SEAL) (SEAL) �Cam& 64Z�Zlv (SEAL) X. CAROLS BMUIM 0 y ax605% 1 &T, ( SEAL) (SEAL) STATE Oi VIRGINIA CiTy/CQUM A4 OF .) ti146Te To —wit: a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that �l;,;'! pRENITH L. BARTLEy, Executor u/w of Arnold or. Bartley, Sr. , W�+ D And individually, whose name is signed to the foregoing Dead personally appeared before me and aeknowledyad the same. s- :. !f 1993. • ?, Given under my hand this 24day of { , • �,. ' u : f,11 �cranti;,w� E.�p)n::.hfarch3.i,1:195 My commission expires gip) • • ,Y i� Notary Public of VIRGINIA To-wit: a Notary Public in and for.the jurisd?.ration aforesaid, do hereby certify that NORiS B, WILSON, whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed lftp,�rsonally appeared before me and acknowledged the sans. tit Given�'undQr my hand this 1,7_ day Of 1993. F - 3 u ray, commission expires My Commigimt EMiMs NMmkq_M 1994 Notary c-' _ WNLLY, TMroaoaiTTa� a G AM ATTOAMM AT LAW b 90V M kfM PR%rr ' �r�nu�r.n.veoruA ,a�e� 9K805pco 168 STATE OF VIRGINIA CITX/ OiRi ly- OF A To -wit: 1, l ... i !I I ,c 1_w..u� 1._ , a Notary Public in .,rend for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that Vi,BRUCE A. BARNETT, whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed sonally appeared before me and acknowledged the same. �.4 �.' Given under my hand this le, day of %o,(�, 1993. ;�'1'' • , �•� ! �f Hy cotuiesion expires « Y Cammissian Explte3 Mayarrbet 3R tggq �(. Illy Notary ub� STA= OF VIRGINIA I CITY/E'Gi3g39C OF 2� To -wit., e/s.e'��'i - , ���� y ::d z t�a -• r f,, • ; a Notary public in hand for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that LyNtt B. WII,SON, Whose name is signed to the :oregoing Dead Personally appeared before me and acknowledged the. sane. } :•=� :Y G Given under my hand this I day of ��Cbb „!_, 1993. r My Cesn talon bpkes Novomher 30.j994 • t my. covna►ission expiren y•i Not Publ a STkn OF VIRGINTA CITY/COUNTY OF r LFA , To -wit: a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction a2arelraid, do huraby certify i.nat LORI WILSON DOUGLAS, whose name in signed to the foregoing ;'wed personally appeared batore me and acknowledged the same. Given under, my hand this 1,7, day of 2993. •.��Y!•r k 1a a V I WA1T, . T>Mon�IORTaI 'ATM IM"ATlM 3WpYTVG IDRf,TA1" .tuMpM�7Y11,Yw101MM Am 0 My CommiWon Expires Novambor 30,1994 ,RX805Pc0169 My commission expires Note-PU13110 I STATE OF VIRGINIA f, �! To -Witt CiTY�(-O' i32FF'1� OF'�i� � �..ti • �, , I /�� a Notary Public in ?'' ♦ +� h ` �bT7Si �oT the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that •lLINDA B. JOHNsoN, whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed rt ~ 1e.Grsonally appeared before me and acknowledged the same, ��' • —LL- -�,�!r,•y•� •• Given under my hand this day of,��•---' 1.993. My commission expires 1994 Notary -Public i hTATE OF VIRGINIA 622'Y/CQwTY OF-- ,Ari , To -wit: �!1 a Notary Public in .�nnd 'for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that Ur • A; ":MOLE BAMILEY, whose name is signed to the foregoing Dead p"z6nally appeared before me and acknowledged the same. .diven under$ my hand this �-j_ day of:Z�Z, 1493. Y n Hy commission expires Niy Corttmasian Exp)res Npvember 3U,1A84 +V Not&-V!? I'ub21c STATE • OIL �IRGi2iI2l CITY/ OP i4-� r h �� , To -wit: I, a�•1 '�+'� P +Gr G , a Notary Public in `and fQ ;the jurisdiction aforesaid, do heraby certify that ACU"Y, T1HlptlOG11'}CM CLAN AttCRMt1 AT LVO- 10 SWTI [MW Frft T IIUM•4ZfiD1.Y;ACWA \� 7]II7 U 0 gJLLY, i i GLII ATTOWV%ATLA:•• � MIYC!{!!{71RY1r1011MA i1M1 tx895eco 170 LORIS E. WILSON, whose nags is signed to the foregoing Deed personally appeared bafora me and acknowledged the same. Given under my hand this 1 rJ day of v;;:J_ , 1.993 My commission expires �dYSS1_o mi+si mi+ai NNaremher 1994 Notary Public STATE OF VIRGINIA CXTY/eOUNW OF �t )�r�ty+e�lci , TO -Wit', I, _Kn Z. C-,,,,o , a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that �JOXCE BARNSTT, whose name is signed to the foregoing Dead ,/ iewiponally appeared before ze and acknowledged the same. Given under my hand this _jday of Liwm�wpx' 1993. •4' Liy Ca:nmisslmi Fxptres hGSrch 91,1995 My commission expires Y roc Notary Pub io J I 4= STATE OP V�GINIA CITY/�96K7PY' OFi�✓ -r TO -Wit: Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that 'TftOMAS p. DOUGLAS, whom name is signed to the foregoing Dead ptrdo;iolly appeared before ma and acknowledged the same, •� F ' ;Given under my Sand this J'2_ day of - , 1993. Y t My commission expires AV,4 �alc� . /�xPY m sr 3u i394 . U Rotary Fub.. a STATIC OF VIRGINI1 0 CITY/OeUNTY OF L, 110chedl'9.0 , To -wit: 0 17 f p a Notaryyublic in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that GEORGg C. UOHNSONO whose name is aignQd to the foregoing Dead personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same. Given under my hand this -15-Ci.-day of -'StLq&PA2W-, 1993. My commission expiresffyCemmissloA&PliesMarch31..1995 Notary Funlici Y P .......... FMDERlrK COUNTY. SCT-, d tc) rna on W, produce 19- -2 day m th�roG,annexed arid With repiks"q D Of %yas admittaJ to rewrO, Tax Im POSV� 'Tt S"-": s�-�5-00 and 58,54 hikye been W.id I It ;:ASE,sWbla. CLRRK SMUY. rAftOCKWORnH ATTOPOM Ar LALI F"FrrmKT WNLA FREDERICK COUNTY INSERT 64A 0 0 Page I of' I I ID Number A SECTION LCYF SUBLOT Record ID Number .owner's '\':illlc Continued Pllvsical House N'llillbel. PlIZ17ic—im §-tIld —.N. io Acreage ON% lier's Address ON$ ne-l-'s'.Wdress Conti-olled Zip Code Total Improvements Total Lod VAtic Total Properly, Value Deed Book -Numbel. bm] l3o�ol Pa Instrument Year ljoildi w_, Sq. FL Mooth Last Sold Date Last Sold I -,,% r Sold Selring, Price 0 AA 4 16 A )020220 WINCIIESTHR METALS INC IM .1 MOLDINGS LLC 345 NIE'LI)SIN/10RE LN WI NCI I I-*STI: R VA 22602 RP 15000 '15000 2005 23688 D 10 12 2005 250000 ROSEN13FRGER 1-16 frrrlrrirk V9 li-,/I�-1.(-.e.,Iiice/C'I]Cllt/PLII)IicAcccssl/t)i-iiitFi-aiiie.litiiiI 12/10/2008 Page I of I k Mora A 11 SECTION SUBLOT Record -1 D-Nil In her Owner's Nalne Owner's N PlNsical (louse Number ' N,se.alSteet 11hCI A-cremle ------- ONS ner's Address O%N ner's Address Continued n!-Co(lc / —0 111 "11,— Total Lu )rovelocnts - Total Land Value -_--- Total Proper —val .. t Deed Book Number Deed Book Page Number Instrument Year Instrument Number 1311i - IN-1-01)(11-1-ast Sold Date Last Sold fear Last- Sold Selling Price 10 i,IA 4 17 )020221 NINCIIFS'1'1-'R NII:TAI,S INC J HOLDINGS LLC 345 PI-11:1,PSMORE LN, WINCI-ILSTEER VA 22602 R D 15000 '15000 D 2005 23688 10 12 2005 250000 ROSENBERGER L17 iic/i--I-(-(-.ifir.f-./C.Ile.iii/Ptil)llcAccessl/i)i-iiitFi-aiiic.litiliI 12/10/2008 Page I of I I ID Number Dot B1.1, SECTION LOT SUBLOT Record ID Number 6-1-111-ci - -'s —Nam-c —COI—Ifinue—d— pilysi . cal House Number IIhN-sic . Street \umblr A c r ca 0 Nv n c r's Address -- Zip Code 7_-0 —.1 i 11 Total IIIIE91+•cmcnls "Dotal Land Value 'I I otal Propert), Value Dc3ook Number I)ced Book Page Number lostru nlen( Year Instrument Number B uildinw_Sq. rt. ,N-lonth Last Sold Date Las( Sold Yea r Lasr Sold §Ciiim�_Price Lc,,tz__al Description . — E 0. ),Iy% 4 18 yl )020222 )lvjj I IOLDINGS LIX 3,15 PI ELPSIVIORE LN WINCHESTE'R VA M02 RP 15000 15000 3 2006 21923 11 27 2006 350000 ROSENBERGER 1-18 • 10 Page I of I '64 A 4 19 —164 SECTION LOT SUBLOT Record 11) Number 611-11 —C, I'liNsical {louse Number --- Physical S -Ir —ce -t N i i i i 11) c i - LIJ c -If �- c --- Own cf.'s Address ONN ncr's Address Continued ?-jj) Code zolli,f,,, Total Improvements Total Land Vallic Total PrOI)CIIN, Value Deed Book Number -)Ced Number -Ins-tr-11111elm Year 1-iistr-timent Number Building_Sq. Ft. Month Last Sold Date Last Sold Year Lasr Sold sellin Price D020223 DMJ I IOLDINGS LLC 1237 tviiij-WOOD PIKE D 345 IIIIELPSMORE LN WINCI IE'STER VA 22602 RP 134,100 51000 185,100 0 2006 21923 1791.2 27 2006 350000 ROSENBERGER 1-19 litti):IIQIS.co.fredei'lek.vcq.tisIFi-ecaiicelCliciitIPLiblicAccessllpi-iiitFi-,iiiie-litiiiI 12/10/2008 Page 1 of 1 C:lmrl Database Pa I ID 'Number" OF D O i li I. B ----- ---- -- ----- —------- LOT — -- -- --- SU B LOT -- ------ Rccord I_D Number -- _ _-------_----- Owner's Name Continued — ------_—_--- —� _ Pbvsical_IIo_use Number ---------------j PhN•sical Street Number —--_--__--- O_wIIer's:\ddress---------- Owner'ss Address Continued --_--- �1 Code— ---------------_-- 7_onim- — Total Inl )rovcmcnts Total Land Value _----___-- Tota1 I'roperty— DCCd 13OIt Number__--_— -- Deed Book I'agc Nlnubcr Insh"umcut_Yc:lr _ I,I's nt Number --- Building Sq. 1—t_--- ----- ------ Mo_nth Last Sol_d_-------_-- ------------ Date Last Sold Year Last. Sold — SClling, Price • = 0 4 20 0020225 DM.I HOLDINGS LLC 0 3,15 PIIELPSMORG LN WINCHESTER VA 22602 RP 0 10000 10000 0 2006 21923 0 27 2006 350000 ROSLNI3GRGL'•R 1/2 OI' 1-20 rk Vn Iq/Frt'c lace/CIient/PuhlicAccessl/DrintFrame.html 12/ 10/2008 View,Dctail • Page I of 1 Real. Estate Public biquiry Ticket Detail • 2008 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2008 Ticket #: 414090002 FRQ:r2 Sup#: I" Name: 89 WINCHESTER METALS INC Account#: 314 Name 2: ID M J HOLDINGS LLC Mapth G4A 4 16A Address: 345 PHELPSMORE LN Description: .04 ACRE WINCHESTER VA 22602 Bill Date: 20081205 Due Date: 12/05/2008 Land: [ $5,000 Iralprovc: I Use: Original Bill: F $13.12 Payments: $13.12- Acres: 0.04 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: AmouIlt OwC(I: Other: Last Date: 11/05/2008 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that II I)BVmcilt IMS t)CC1) rcCelVed \vlthlll t11e h1St 10 I)IIShICSS (1ily$, am, 1'Ctt11'11Cd itCI115 111ZIV IIOt be I)OStCd ill tbiS tulle Please Check the \Vel)SItC again. 'a Date Type hl't111sactlo❑ }{ t�f110lllltu 13.11n11Ce¢ 12/55/2008 Charge 0 $13.12 $13.12 Ili5/, Payment 502&t ($13.12) $0.00 I Use the print Ivey for your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search • Previous llttns://taxes.co.frederick.va.us/At)l)licatiorts/REPubliclnquiry/ViewDetail.aspx 12/9/2008 ViewDetai1 • • Page t of 1 Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Derail • 2008 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2008 Ticket 9: 414080002 FRQ:r2 Sup#: F0 Name: IWINCHESTER METALS INC Accolllatg: 20220 Name 2: D M J HOLDINGS LLC Map#: 64A 4 16 Address: 345 PHELPSMORE LN Description: IROSENBERGER L16 WINCHESTER VA Bill Date: 20081205 22602 Due Date: 12105/2008 Land: [_ $45,000 Improve: I Use: Oa-igiaaall3ill: $118.12 Payments: $118.12- Acres: 0.00 Penalri' Paid; Int Paid: Amount O�Ye(I; Other: Lust Date: 11/05/2008 Tonal Owed: Penally: Interest: Note that if payment has been received within the last 10 business days, any returned items nhzty not be posted at this lime Please check the website again. Date Type Transaction It Amount Balance 12/5/2008 Charge 0 $1 18.12 $1 18.12 1 1 5/2008 Payment 502811 ($1 18.12) $0.00 I Ise the print Iccy for }our bro«ser to print a copy of taxes paid f'or this year. 11 New Search • Previous hltns://taxes.co.f-eclei-ick.va.us/Ai)nlications/R] Pub]iCInquiry/VIewDetai1.asl)x 12/9/2008 VIeNvDetail Page 1 of I Real. Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail • 2008 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2008 Ticket 9: 414100002 FRQ:[�— Sup#: Name: WINCHESTER METALS INC Account#: 20221 i� Name 2: ID M J HOLDINGS LLC Map#: 64A 4 17 Address: 345 PHELPSMORE LN Description: ROSENBERGER L17 WINCHESTER VA 22 002 Bill Date: 20081205 Due Date: 12105/2008 Land: $45,000 Improve: Use: $118.12 Payments: $118.12- Acres; 0.00 Original Bill: 3 Penalty Paid: Int Paid: Amount Owed: Otlier; Last Date: 11/05/2008 Total Owed; Penalty: Interest: Note that i1 payment has been received +'t(hln (hC last 10 bUSInCSS days, any I-CtUnied Items ma\- not be pasted at this tile" PI as e ch ck the website again Type 'I-rsulsaction 11 Amount Iia lB nee Date 12/5/2008 Char-e 0 118. 12 $ 118.1 1 I:'>/2008 Payment 50284 (G 118.12)0.00 1 Usc the print key foi- your browser to pl•lnt a copy of taxes paid for this year. 11 New Search • Previous lift „c,//ta.•pc rn vn rIs/Annlications/REPublicltigtury/ViewDetail.aspx 12/9/2008 ViewDetail • • Page 1 of I Real Estate Public biquiry Ticket Detail. • 2008 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2008 Ticket 9: 98060002 FRQ:r2 Sup#: Iv iane: DMJ HOLDINGS LLC Account#: 20222 b Name 2: Ma1)-9: 64A 4 18 Address: 345 PHELPSMORE LN Description: ROSENBERGER L18 WINCHESTER VA 22602 — Bill Date: 20081205 Due Date: 12/05/2008 Lan(l: $45,000 Improve: Use: Original Bill: $118.12 Payments: $118.12- Acres: 0.00 Penalty Paid: lilt Paid: Amount Owe(I: Other: Last Date: 11/05/2008 Total Owed: Penalty: Intel-est: Note that Il pz,\'nlellt Ilas been received within the last 10 btlSllleSS (IaVS. any I-CtLll'i1Cd ILCI11S 111:1\. not be pllstcd at LhIS time Pleaw check the website auain. Date Type TrflnSactio❑ r/ Amount 13,11nnce l 2/5/2008 Cl1al v 0 $1 18.12 $1 18.12 1 1 /5/2008 Payment 50284 ($1 18.12) $0.00 I I USe t -print lacy for your bi-oivsel- to print a copy of taxes paid for this yeah 11 New Search Previous llttl)s:Htaxes.co. frederick.va.Lls/Al)pllcatlolls/RrPllbllclll(ILllry/V1ewDetall.aspx 12/9/2008 VIc%vDctall Page I of 1 Real Estate Public Inquiry Ticket Detail • 2008 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : RE2008 Ticket #: 98070002 FRQ:F Sup#: r0 Name: DMJ HOLDINGS LLC Account#: 20223 Name 2: Map#: 64A 4 19 Address:345 PHELPSMORE LN Deseription: ROSENBERGER L19 WINCHESTER VA 22602 Bill Date: 20081205 Due Date: 12105/2008 Land: r— $51,000 Improve: $134,400 Use: Original Bill:F $486.67 Payments: $486.67- Acres: 0.00 Penalty Paid: Illt Paid: Amount Owed: Other: �— Last Date: 11/05/2008 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that It PavIllent has been received within the last 10 t)LISIIICSS clays, any I'CtUrIIed Ileitis may not be posted at this llille Please', Check the website a'uain. �7- Date rv1)e Tr:111snetlo❑ Pi Amount 13:11:111Cu 12/5/2005 Charge 0 $486.67 S, 486.67 1 1 /5/2008 Payment 50234 (VS6.67) $0.00 1 ;se the print key Im- your browser to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search Previous lions://taxes.co.f-edericl(.Va.us/At)i>lications/REPubIiClllgLliry/VicwDetai1.asl)x 12/9/2008 Vle\vDetall . 0 Page I of I Real Estate Public Inquijy Ticket Detail • 2008 REAL ESTATE TAXES Department# : IRE2008 Ticket th 98080002 FRQ: V Sup#: Iv- -Name: DMJ HOLDINGS LLC Account#: 20225 Name 2: Map#: 164A 4 20 Address: 345 PHELPSMORE LN Description: ROSENBERGER 1/2 OF L20 WINCHESTER VA Bill Date: 120081205 22602 Due Date: 12/05/2008 Land: $10-000 Improve: Use: Oribinal Bill: $26.25 Payments: $26.25- Acres: 0.00 Penalti- Paid: Int Paid: Amount Owed; Other: Last Date: 11/05/2008 Total Owed: Penalty: Interest: Note that il'payment has been received within the Dist 10 business clays, any rettn•ned items may not be posted at this time. Please check the website a,ain. Date type Transaction tt Amount Balance 12/5/2008 Charge 0 $26.25 $26.25 II/5/2008 Payment 50284 ($26.25) "0.00 I Use the print key for your browscr to print a copy of taxes paid for this year. New Search 0, Previous littns://taxes.co.freclerick.va.us/Aoi)lications/RrPub]icingtairv/VicwDetail.ashx 12/9/2008 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Finance Department FROM: Pam Deeter, Office Assistant II SUBJECT: Return Of Sign Deposit DATE: November 6, 2009 The amount of $50.00 was deposited in line item #3-010-019110-0008 for DMJ Holdings. Painter -Lewis had a deposit for one sign for Rezoning #05-09 for DMJ Holdings. Mr. Lewis has returned the sign and is therefore entitled to the return of the deposit. You may pay this through the regular bill cycle. Please send a check in the amount of $50.00 to: Painter —Lewis P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade Ste 120 RECEIVED FROM AD'R/ESS 8� 2i`i L JFOR RENT JFOR ri ACCOUNT CASH AMT PAID DATE 2 U C� NO- 119 4 5U DOLLARS $ or1 �zz r 5 0t 11F . �l' ,`J;wy," :�5', CHECK 3 • .s7;r' BALANCE MONEY - 1� ORDER BY �jjS_1,Q0— w ` wtsalance uue a Cash 15.00 Pd by PLANNING Check 10335.00 # VARIOU: BALANCE DUE INCLUDES PENALTY/INTEREST THRU THE MONTH 8/2009 I 0 0 0 600Z/9 x HZNO1rI°agD SIIOI�n # 00-SSSOI us�a 00-SZ �Z`IFZII3a s3Qf12OIII QnQ JQ p J�g f12iHs ySgggylIl/ NINi�'Id $ anQ a°u-el-ea* 00' $ p T e a °uiFi 00'OS $ �saza�ul 00' $ I��Z�uaa �dT°uzzd buTag Z 00' $ pz�a 00' OS aau�Z�S $ 00-OS snoz�azd S60Z :# # � da CI .SugzS, SS'v6S r :za�szba2i ZSx?i'I/� GI-eQ 600Z/ZZ/8 a�{aZy Z0006Z90000:# ONINNK'Ia SZZO-309ZZ VA a � o�co � E li ens SZZ XOEJ O 1 S a `33OQTao II'IIM �neY R�gOC�v ASS 2 Zllln O ?IOId3Q3Y X Z FoY T CO Eg se M. y a I a 0 a 2i szisoaac Nels aa,SaxoNIM �Jiar-1 5 flp,TES ,es 1uwl4ll e B ustbe lea �e � du es pyYst��pxoPe�`J Rea�stais�ct S� etL�A�1f `xaxes u Secona�ptopeth' person Dec.5 Reap Dish°t S� etL �t n of�ies �yo on expo 'DOS uaSbiUedb`J the Cow Offer, aue sdao�ce Aadres' Revere° aiM ty Tte FX�erick0 �°X225 p. �A226 °he�toT' 665-560 a>I P,aa xna f��p0'fre� �s O 'Tre�uxeF�aa• Painter -Lewis, P.L.C. 817 Cedar Creek Grade, Suite 120 Winchester, Virginia 22601 540-662-5792 office(a)painterlewis. com August 20, 2009 Mr. Mike Ruddy Frederick Co. Dept. of Panning & Development AF, 2 0 2009 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 ` RE: DMJ HOLDINGS, L.L.C. ROUTE 50 & CUSTER AVENUE Dear Mike, Enclosed, please find the following information for the above referenced project: A revised packet which includes the agency comments/approvals, Impact Analysis Statement and Proffer Statements. Please note a letter from Stowe Engineering has been added to the Traffic Impact Analysis section for your review. A fee check, in the amount of $10,285.00 for the application. A check, in the amount of $50 for the sign deposit. Please feel free to contact this office if you have any questions or require additional information. ince ely, U,E 'I s Engineering Admin. Assistant PAINTER-LEWIS, P.L.C. Enclosure JOB NUMBER: 0812002 s COUNTY of FREDERICK Department o1' Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING September 23, 2009 TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION #05-09 FOR DM.I HOLDINGS, LLC On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, October 14, 2009, at 7:15 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia to consider the following application: Rezoning #05-09 of DMJ Holdings, LLC, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to B2 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East and Custer Avenue (Route 781), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 64A-4- 16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend the public hearing. A copy of the application will be available for review at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library the week of the meeting, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia, or by calling (540) 665-5651. You can also visit us on the web at: www.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, A4CA- 7- Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director MTR/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 This is to c72z'� ?at the attached correspondence Nv mailed to the following on 4 from tbce Department of Plaru�ulg and Development, Frederick County, Virginia: 64 - A- - 93- 64A - 4- - 16-A WINCHESTER METALS INC D M J HOLDINGS LLC 345 PHELPSMORE LN WINCHESTER VA Painter -Lewis PLC 817 Cedar Creek Grade. Ste. 120 Wincllester, VA 22601 EFG INVESTMENTS LLC 340 W PARKINS MILL RD WINCHESTER VA 64A -10. 1. 145- 22602.2074 RHYNE JERRY L & JULIE L 107 CLARENDON CT WINCHESTER VA 64A - 4- - 20-A CARROLL JAMES H PO BOX 3214 WINCHESTER VA 22604.2414 64A -10. 1. 153- SCHRAFF TIMOTHY P & AMANDA K 130 ETNAM ST WINCHESTER VA 22602.7310 64A -10. 1. 152- PYLE GLENN R 128 ETNAM ST WINCHESTER VA 64A -10. 1. 151- BRYANT THOMAS E II BRYANT STEPHANIE Y 126 ETNAM ST WINCHESTER VA 22602.7310 64A .10. 1. 144- PRITCHETT ELYSE J PRITCHETT RALPH 106CLARENDON CT WINCHESTER VA 22602.4735 22602.4356 22602.4356 64A - 4- - 15- CARTERJAN 1191 MILLWOOD PIKE WINCHESTER VA 22602.4313 64 - A- - 89-A MARLOW INVESTMENTS LC 707 N COMMERCE AVE FRONT ROYAL VA 22630.3419 22602.7310 Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Dir ctw Frederick County Planning Department STATE OF_VIRGE\'IA COUNTY OF-FREDERICK I, , a Notazy Public in and for the State and County aforesaidIdereby certify that MfGhael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director for the Department of Plamu d Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated , has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my Stat and ounty aforesaid. f Given under my hand this C�2A Y da of My commission expires on =NOTA[?YID NOTH.GER 1878CORY IVIRGINIA MY ULY 31, 201 1 NOTARY PAJBLIC 64A - A- - 13- 16 10 WINCHESTER OUTDOOR 355 S POTOMAC ST HAGERSTOWN MD 21740-6032 64 - A- - 96- SMITH LULA M 768 HUNTING RIDGE RD WINCHESTER VA 22603.2936 64A -11- 2- 203-C PEMBRIDGE HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS PO BOX 3838 WINCHESTER VA 22604-8274 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING September 4, 2009 TO: THE APPLICANT(S) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: REZONING APPLICATION 405-09 FOR DMJ HOLDINGS, LLC On behalf of the Frederick County Planning Commission, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Wednesday, September 16, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia to consider the following application: Rezoning #05-09 of DMJ Holdings, LLC, submitted by Painter -Lewis, PLC, to rezone 2.85 acres from RP (Residential Performance) District to 132 (General Business) District, with proffers, for Commercial Use. The properties are located at the northwest corner of Route 50 East and Custer Avenue (Route 781), in the Shawnee Magisterial District, and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 64A-4- 16A, 64A-4-16, 64A-4-17, 64A-4-18, 64A-4-19 and 64A-4-20. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend the public hearing. A copy of the application will be available for review at the Handley Library and the Bowman Library the week of the meeting, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia, or by calling (540) 665-5651. You can also visit us on the web at: wvr,A,.co.frederick.va.us. Sincerely, Michael T. Ruddy, AICP Deputy Planning Director MTR/bad 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 .♦ certify that the attached cO>�espondence ���a3�" mailed to the f01.1o«ving on This is to y from the Depaitinent of Planning arming and Development, Frederick Count),, Virginia: 64A - 4- - 16-A WINCHESTER METALS INC D M J HOLDINGS LLC 345 PHELPSMORE LN WINCHESTER VA Painter -Lc\, is PLC 817 Cedar Creek Grade. Ste. 120 Winchester, VA 22601 64 - A- - 93- EFG INVESTMENTS LLC 340 W PARKINS MILL RD WINCHESTER VA 22602.2074 64A .10. 1. 145- RHYNE JERRY L & JULIE L 107 CLARENDON CT WINCHESTER VA 64A - 4- - 20-A CARROLL JAMES H PO BOX 3214 WINCHESTER VA 22604.2414 64A -10. 1. 153- SCHRAFF TIMOTHY P & AMANDA K 130 ETNAM ST WINCHESTER VA 22602.7310 64A -10. 1. 152- PYLE GLENN R 128 ETNAM ST WINCHESTER VA 64A -10. 1. 151- BRYANT THOMAS E II BRYANT STEPHANIE Y 126 ETNAM ST WINCHESTER VA 22602-7310 22602.7310 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK 64A -10. 1. 144- PRITCHETT ELYSE J PRITCHETT RALPH 106 CLARENDON CT WINCHESTER VA 22602.4735 22602.4356 22602.4356 64A - 4- - 15- CARTER JAN 1191 MILLWOOD PIKE WINCHESTER VA 22602.4313 64 - A- - 89-A MARLOW INVESTMENTS LC 707 N COMMERCE AVE FRONT ROYAL VA 22630.3419 ----- /C-1 Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning POector Frederick County Planning Department a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Michael T. Ruddy, Deputy Planning Director for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated ���, has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of __1 t) 1 09- My commission expires on !� 1'� 30 o�� GAG NOTARY PUBLIC DIANE L, WALSH NOTARY PUBLIC -REGISTRATION S 354475 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2012 64A - A- - 13- fb 10 WINCHESTER OUTDOOR 355 S POTOMAC ST HAGERSTOWN MO 21740-6032 64 - A- - 96- SMITH LULA M 768 HUNTING RIDGE RD WINCHESTER VA 22603.2936 64A -11.2- 203-C PEMBRIDGE HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS PO BOX 3838 WINCHESTER VA 2.2604.8274 40:BARBAPA-DATA PROCESSING 4MPAC7ANAL MENT FROM:BEV - Planning Dept. DMJ Holdings, L.L.C. f �u` Please print � sets o DS—� �1;- � �2' -. THANIK51 , STEEP SLOPES According to the soil survey information there are no steep slopes located on this site. The general elevation of the site is lower than the adjacent residential lots and therefore, the apparent height of commercial buildings will be minimized when viewed from the neighborhood. MATURE WOODLANDS There are no mature woodlands located on this site. SOILS According to the Soil Survey of Frederick County, the site contains the following soil types: • Blairton silt loam: 3C (7-15%) This soil is moderately deep, strongly sloping, and somewhat poorly drained. It is mostly found along heads of drainage ways and in broad upland depressions. • Weikert-Berks channery silt loams: 41 D (15-25%) This consists of shallow and moderately deep, moderately steep, well drained soils on side slopes and ridges. B. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The parcels to be rezoned are bordered to the north by residential properties contained within the Pembridge Heights subdivision. The parcel to the west is residential. The parcel to the east is zoned B2 and is vacant. The parcels directly across Route 50 to the south are all zoned 132. The following table lists all adjacent owners and parcel numbers. Tax Map No. Owner Ex. Zoning Ex. Use 64A-4-20A Carroll, James H. 132 Vacant 64A-10-1-B Carroll, James H. B2 Vacant 64A-1 0-1 -1 5 chraff, Timothy & Amanda RA Residential 64A-10-1-15 yle, Glenn I RP I Residential j 64A-10-1-15 B ant, Thomas & Stephanie RA Residential 64-A-93� EFG Investments, LLC B2 Vacant 164A-10-1-14 Rhyne, Jerry & Julie RA Residential 64A-10-1-144 Pritchett, Elyse & Ralph RA Residential 64A-4-15 L' Carter, Jan RP Residential 64-A-89A✓" Marlow Investments, LC B2 Commercial 64A-A-13 Winchester Outdoor RP Commercial C. TRAFFIC The property is located at the signalized intersection of Custer Avenue and Route 50. According to the Frederick County Eastern Road Plan, Route 50 is designated as a six lane, divided, urban section. At the location of the site, Route 50 is generally a four lane, divided, rural section. Please refer to the existing conditions plan shown on Exhibit 2 on 3 t •�ti IX '' ♦ _ BOA � •r'•'• Y, ��•^ r ', I i ♦ ' Dr�,•r� ` '. Aor r 09r 10- 2009 A Document Approval Form kV 2 0 2009 PLEASE REVIEW THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT. IF THIS DOCUMENT MEETS YOUR APPROVAL PLEASE INITIAL AND PROVIDE THE DATE AND TIME OF YOUR APPROVAL. IF THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT MEET YOUR APPROVAL PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS AS TO WHAT YO U WO ULD LIKE TO HA VE COMPLETED. INITIALS DATE & TIML Candice Mark Dana Eric Mike _L//�� `� c' /Z6 John COMMENTS: - < - -- �v Tf c nr;,, -C-)a 00 ,--A U I - Received by Clerical Staff (Date & Time): PD 9 DZl 0 U:\Pam\Common\Document Approval Form.wpd '� ✓ J