HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-24 Comments from REZ 10-22 FRUIT HILL PROPERTY TIA REVIEW, FREDERICK COUNTY
VDOT EDINBURG RESIDENCY / STAUNTON DISTRICT
Review of Fruit Hill Property Traffic Impact Analysis
VDOT – October 28, 2022
The Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed the updated proffer statement for the Fruit Hill Property
project in Frederick County, submitted October 19th, 2022. We offer the following comments on this submission:
1. In the letter with the rezoning updates, it states that the applicant believes VDOT's TIA comments have been
addressed. The TIA still needs to be updated based on VDOT’s 1st submission review comments, but we are
waiting on guidance from VDOT Central Office Traffic Engineering regarding analysis methodology related to two
of our comments.
2. Proffer 1.6.1 has been updated to now state "any permitted use" that results in a higher trip generation than the
assumptions used in the TIA. A revised TIA subject to county and VDOT approval and any additional mitigation is
tied to site plan approval.
3. Proffer 1.6.2 should be clarified to indicate that existing traffic counts related to the subject development will
not be utilized to determine the need for a new TIA in the case of a land use change resulting in higher trip
generation than the assumptions used in the TIA. If there is existing development on the property at such time
that a new TIA is warranted per proffer 1.6.1, the existing development volume will be captured in the baseline /
existing year data collection and analysis associated with the new TIA.
4. Proffer 3.13 should be updated to replace all references of a traffic signal to an intersection improvement as
determined and approved through a VDOT Signal Justification Report.
5. A typical section should be provided on the GDP for the proposed 2-lane roadway (Fruit Hill Road, Proffer 3.2).
VDOT’s preference would be for the center median to be provided and the two inside lanes of the ultimate U4D
be constructed in the interim.
6. Please note that an Operational Safety Analysis Report (OSAR) is required for any changes proposed to the
interchange. The OSAR must be submitted to FHWA for approval and the intent is to demonstrate that the
proposed project will have no significant adverse impact on the operations and safety on the facility.
FRUIT HILL PROPERTY TIA REVIEW, FREDERICK COUNTY
VDOT EDINBURG RESIDENCY / STAUNTON DISTRICT
{P1225776.DOCX / 1 VDOT comments 006260 000013}
Review of Fruit Hill Property Traffic Impact Analysis
VDOT – August 8, 2022
The Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis for the Fruit Hill Property TIA in
Frederick County, dated April 2022 and submitted June 14, 2022. We have developed the following comments on the
initial TIA submission.
1. The TIA is assuming all low volume uses (warehouse, data center) for trip generation while not proffering out
other potential uses for light industrial zoning. For example, if confined to the uses as shown in the TIA the site
will generate 452 PM peak trips. A “general light industrial (ITE 110)” use would generate over 3.5 times the
volume at 1626 PM peak trips. The middle of the road assumption, would be an mixed use “industrial park (ITE
130)” 872 PM peak hour trips. This could have a tremendous impact on the studied intersections, ramps, and
roadways. We typically suggest a worse-case senerio but feel more comfortable with either the middle of the
road assumption or proffers that actually restrict the uses to the peak hour study volumes.
2. Proffers 1.6, 1.6.1 and 1.6.2 are very weak in providing any future mitigations and many higher generation uses.
Any proffers not obtained with the rezoning will likely never happen.
3. The recall mode for the coordinated signal phases should be set to C-Max, instead of C-Min. Please revise.
4. The footnote on page 20 of the TIA states “the current lane configuration on the northbound approach of the
Rest Church Road / I-81 Northbound Ramps intersection does not comply with NEMA phasing. As such, HCM
2000 outputs are reported for signalized intersections.” It is the phase assignment on the southbound ramp
that does not comply with NEMA phasing. This phase should be adjusted from Phase 3 to Phase 4 to make the
intersection NEMA compliant. The analysis results should then be updated to HCM 6 throughout the report per
TOSAM requirements.
5. There are inconsistencies with the methodology of reporting queue lengths throughout the TIA. Some scenarios
report 95% queue length from Synchro at the ramp intersections, but report max queue length from SimTraffic
for the US 11 / Rest Church Road intersection. Other scenarios report max queue length from SimTraffic for all
signalized intersections along the corridor, while the 2034 Total Mitigated scenario has an additional footnote
that only the US 11 / Rest Church Road intersection PM peak hour queue lengths are reported from SimTraffic.
Please provide additional information to support the approach used to report queue lengths in the analysis. A
follow up discussion with VDOT may be necessary to determine and agreed upon a methodology for reporting
queue lengths.
6. Page 18 of the TIA states that traffic counts were conducted in October 2021 from 3-6 pm. Please correct to
match the traffic data collection times of 4-7 pm as reported in the appendix.
7. There is a significant discrepancy of 300 vehicles in I-81 southbound ramp left turns in the 2034 background and
2034 background with mitigation AM scenarios. The left turns in these models are coded as 511, but should be
211 based on the 2034 total build scenarios. As a result, inaccurate delays and queue lengths are reported in
Tables 12 and 13 in the TIA. Please revise.
FRUIT HILL PROPERTY TIA REVIEW, FREDERICK COUNTY
VDOT EDINBURG RESIDENCY / STAUNTON DISTRICT
{P1225776.DOCX / 1 VDOT comments 006260 000013}
8. Table 10 of the report indicates that an eastbound right turn lane from Rest Church Road onto relocated Zachary
Ann Lane is not warranted based on the site trip generation and this right turn lane is not included in the report
recommendations. However, a right turn lane is modeled in the PM Total Mitigation Synchro files. Please
update the files for consistency with the report.
9. The proposed realignment of Zachary Ann Lane to the west as illustrated in the Conceptual Site Plan included as
Figure 2 in the TIA will have a significant impact on truck egress from the existing Flying J development. The
realignment will require trucks from Flying J to navigate through the road network of the proposed development
to return to Rest Church Road. Has the applicant had discussions with the Flying J property owner to determine
if this proposed improvement is supported?
10. Consider simplifying proffer 3.6 to state that the monetary contribution shall be used toward future
transportation improvements at the US 11 / Rest Church Road intersection and the I-81, Exit 323 northbound
ramp to address operational issues as indicated in the TIA.
11. The proposed 60’ right-of-way for Fruit Hill Road (collector road) will not accommodate the 4-lane divided road
shown in the County’s transportation plan. If the roadway is proposed for addition into the VDOT system, then
it should be designed per geometric design standards for urban collector GS-7 with a 45-50 MPH design speed.
A typical section should be developed to determine the amount of right-of-way and/or easements needed to
accommodate the U4D and any bike and pedestrian access.
12. The section of Rest Church Road from Flying J Travel Center to the collector proposed in this application is
shown on the county transportation plan to be a 4 lane divided road. The GDP does not match the
transportation plan and only shows a right-of-way dedication and construction 2 lanes with a left turn lane at
this intersection. Based on future traffic a U4D roadway is needed up to the collector as well as additional area
to transition back to 2 lanes on Rest Church Road.
13. Based on the existing lane geometry of Rest Church Road to the west of the I-81 southbound ramp intersection,
the westbound left turn lane to Fruit Hill Road should be continuous and extend back to the ramp signal.
14. The County’s exisiting 30’ prescriptive easement on Rest Church Road (Rte. 669) is inadequate for maintenance
or even minor future improvements. Typically a 50’ wide right-of-way is needed for a two lane secondary
roadway or 25’ dedication from the center of the roadway.
15. The existing Ruebuck Lane (Rte. 670) intersection at Rest Church Road cannot obtain or maintain minimum sight
distance without additional right-of-way along Rest Church Road to the east.
16. We have no objections to the abandonment of the end of Ruebuck Lane as shown on the GDP. However, this
road does not provide an area for public, emergency, or maintenance services to turn around. A 55’ radial right-
of-way is needed for a cul-de-sac area at the last driveway (where grade permits) a cul-de-sac to be constructed
outside the flood plan.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/ 665-5651
Fax: 540/ 665-6395
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
July 25, 2022
John H. Foote
Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh
4310 Prince William Parkway
Suite 300
Prince William, VA 22192
RE: Request for Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Comments
Fruit Hill Rezoning Application
Zoning: RA (Rural Areas) District
Property Identification Numbers (PINs): 33-A-90, 33-A-89, and 33-9-1A
Magisterial District: Stonewall
Dear Mr. Foote:
The Frederick County Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) considered the above referenced
rezoning application during their meeting on July 19, 2022. This application seeks to rezone three
parcels totaling 220.06 acres of land generally located on the south side of Rest
Church Road (Route 669), west of Zachary Ann Lane (Route 825), in close proximity to the
exit 323 along I-81. The parcels are currently zoned as RA (Rural Areas) and the proposed rezoning is
to M1 (Light Industrial), B2 (General Business), and OM (Office-Manufacturing Park).
Following their review of this application, the HRAB recommended a Phase 2 study be conducted to
further examine the interiors and building materials of the Lewis-Solenberger House and the Cather
House. The HRAB recommended that the applicant consider referencing the Department of Historic
Resources light detection and ranging (LiDAR) maps to document the presence of significant objects
within the property.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application. Please call if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Wyatt Pearson, AICP
Director of Planning & Development
WGP/pd
cc: Gary Crawford, HRAB Chairman
Tyler Klein, Frederick County Senior Planner