HomeMy WebLinkAbout21-06 Traffic Impact Analysis* •
0
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of
Willow Run
Located in:
Frederick County, Virginia
Prepared for:
•
Miller and Smith
Greystone Properties
8401 Greensboro Drive
Suite 300
McLean, VA
22102
Prepared by:
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc
Endneers. Surveyors. Planners. Landscape Architects.
A
300 Foxcroft Avenue, Suite 200
Virginia 25401
g
P1.
11
H T
1
F 304.26
June 22, 2006
(Revised from the July 2005 submission)
11
0
• OVERVIEW
Report Summary
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR +A) has prepared this "revised" traffic
study (from July 2005 submission) for Miller and Smith and Greystone Properties to
present the impacts associated with the proposed Willow Run development located
northeast of the Cedar Creek Grade (Route 622)/Route 37 interchange in Frederick County,
Virginia. The purpose of this report is to amend the Phase 1 and Phase 2 analyses using the
revised land use and future roadway network. Phase 1 includes 260 single family- detached
units and 339 single family- attached units that will be built -out by Year 2009. Phase 2 (full
build -out) consists of 425 single family- detached units, 490 single family - attached units,
416 apartment units, 108 elderly housing - attached units, 150,000 square feet of office and
225,000 square feet of retail, which will be built -out by Year 2012. In order to
accommodate the future traffic volumes, PHR +A assumed the following infrastructure
improvements with respect to each Phase. Phase 1 includes: 1) Completion of Jubal Early
Drive Extended from the existing Jubal Early Drive, through the Willow Run development,
to a point east of Merrimans Lane; 2) Completion of Willow Run Drive from the Jubal
Early Drive Extended to a point north of Cedar Creek Grade, 3) Completion of Birch Mont
Drive from the Jubal Early Drive Extended to Cedar Creek Grade, 4) Completion of the
Meadow Branch Avenue Extended to Route 50 and 5) Realignment of Merrimans Lane
north of Breckinridge Lane. Phase 2 assumes the improvements described under Phase 1
as well as the following infrastructure improvements: 1) Completion of the Jubal Early
Drive Extended to Route 37, 2) Completion of a diamond interchange at the intersection of
Merrimans Lane/Route 37 and 3) Realignment of Merrimans Lane north of the new
Merrimans Lane/Route 37 interchange. Figure 1 is provided to illustrate the location of
Willow Run with respect to the surrounding roadway network.
Methodology
The traffic impacts accompanying the Willow Run development were obtained
through a sequence of activities as the narratives that follow document:
• Assessment of background traffic including other planned projects in the area of
impact,
• Calculation of trip generation for Willow Run,
• Distribution and assignment of Willow Run generated trips onto the completed study
area road network,
• Analysis of capacity and level of service using the newest version of the highway
capacity software, HCS -2000, for existing and future conditions.
•
�� A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 1
r I
•
0
No Scale
• Figure 1
Pm + A
Vicinity Map
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 2
0
•
•
Ui
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Patton Harris Rust & Associates, pc (PHR +A) obtained AM and PM peak hour
manual turning movement counts at the intersections of Cedar Creek Grade (Route
622)/Merrimans Lane (Route 621), Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37 interchange ramps, Cedar
Creek Grade/Harvest Drive, US Route 50/Route 37 interchange ramps, US Route
50/Merrimans Lane, Merrimans LaneBreckinridge Lane, Jubal Early Drive/Handley
Avenue and Jubal Early DriveNalley Avenue. Additionally, 24 -hour automatic "tube"
counts were conducted along the Cedar Creek Grade west of Harvest Drive. PHR +A
established the ADT (Average Daily Traffic) along each of the study area roadway links
using an assumed "k" factor (the ratio of PM peak hour traffic volumes to 24 -hour traffic
volumes) of 10 %.
Figure 2 shows the existing ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key
locations throughout the study area. Figure 3 shows the respective existing lane geometry
and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All traffic count data and HCS -2000 levels of
service worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report.
Pj4 + t
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 3
0
0
• " %. 194(2 85 )
4.439(126
(206)542...p Route 50
(
- � No Scale
'°j
45(43)
X
Route 50 if°133(159)
'ill (44)3 I 1
�o
o 0
( (247) � 4 A
4 461(3086)
53( 51
v ~ 16
e - 228(603)
(
) '� f
6ipe Handley
a Route 50
(
d e Ave
m
621 Lp �n� G !
b N
a
Handley Ave
I dBe j
,it � A,
dr
5
37
�_ 26 )
e
( of 4® 275(855)
o° MN X24(63)
(603 )70q�
622
11 X 39(128)
� 59(91)
(14 )21..
Cep CT
.0 ) p
(51)53
j
C>i�
®� 6
(3)12
s � n
z y
b q
X387(662
4.56(115)
14 4- 27(147)
(45)89. Route 622
X43(69) (563 4q1 ®, )I
(59) 08--/ w Route 622
.�
(56)47
l
Z
w
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
Figure 2 Existing ADT and AN"M Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 4
D(C)
4e
(C)D„Ji Route 50
�
�► 4 �^ No Scale
�A(B) LG ignalized
Intersection
V� Signalized Route 50 LOS =D(C)
G Intersection
LOS =C(C) j Signalized
B(C) .� r Intersection
(C)B a>� G LOS = B(C)
a Route 50 V '
(C)C..� d
° Ala) *
c�d Handley
621 e td ■ Ave
CC VA 6 ® Unsignalized
N Intersection
x
? L
a°
Handley Ave
Q
B B(C).
• 37 ✓
4' Unsignalized Try 4-C(C)
Intersection �oG 64 ;
Signalized
Intersection
LOS = QQ
1
*B)A Unsignalized
1 � 622 Intersection
K
d B(B)* C1eek ®e�
>(B)Bz kFA p
Unsignn } ^ -
5 �9 �p0 J (A)A�
/ * Denotes critical unsignalized movement
VH +� AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
• Figure 3 Existing conditions Lane Geometry and Level of Service
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2(X)6
Page 5
•
PHASE 1 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS (2009)
•
Phase 1 is analyzed assuming the anticipated future roadway network that includes
the following: 1) Completion of the Jubal Early Drive Extended from the existing Jubal
Early Drive, through the Willow Run development, to a point east of Merrimans Lane; 2)
Completion of Willow Run Drive from the Jubal Early Drive Extended to a point north of
Cedar Creek Grade, 3) Completion of Birch Mont Drive from the Jubal Early Drive
Extended to Cedar Creek Grade, 4) Completion of the Meadow Branch Avenue Extended
to Route 50 and 5) Realignment of Merrimans Lane north of Breckinridge Lane.
2009 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
In order to accurately depict future conditions within the study area, PHR +A
utilized A Trafc Impact Analvsis of the WWW Property by PHR +A, dated December 5,
2002 to determine the trips associated with not yet completed area developments:. Based
upon the 7` Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation
Report and the aforementioned traffic study, Tables la and lb are provided to summarize
the calculated trips associated with each of the 2009 `other developments ".
Table la
Background Development: WWW Property
Trip Generation Summary
ITE
AM
Peak
Hour
1'M
Peak
Hour
Land Use
Amount
ADT
In
Out
I Total
In
I Out
Total
Code
750
Office Park
5 acres
350
30
381
34
194
229
2241
813
Discount Superstore
135,000 SF
127
122
248
252
262
514
6030
820
Shopping Center
25,000 SF
42
27
68
120
130
251
2758
Total
519
179
697
406
587
993
11,028
Total hiternall
34
34
68
83
83
165
1,898
Total Pass-by
25
22
47
56
59
115
1318
Total "New Trips"
459
122
582
1 268
445
713
1 7812
44 Rl L
IL JL
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 6
•
•
F
Table lb
Background Development: Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties
Trin Generation Summary
ITE
Land Use
Amount
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak Hour
ADT
In
Out
Total
In T
Out
Total
Code
Valley Health Systems Property
150
warehousing (Distribution Center)
5 acres
63
25
88
26
48
73
383
710
Office
50,000 SF
95
13
108
23
112
135
782
750
Office Park
5 acres
350
30
381
34
194
229
2241
620
Nursing Home
24,000 SF
6
3
9
5
5
10
146
252
Elderly Housing - Attach
80 units
3
4
6
5
3
9
278
Sub -total
517
75
592
93
363
456
3831
Degrange Property
312
Business Hotel
50 rooms
17
12
29
19
12
31
364
760
Research & Development Park
5 acres
70
13
84
9
68
77
398
820
Shopping Center
25,000 SF
43
27
70
121
131
252
2795
912
Drive -in Bank
2,400 SF
17
13
30
55
55
1I0
694
932
H -T Restaurant
7,600 SF
46
42
88
51
32
83
966
Sub -total
192
108
300
254
298
552
5218
Total
709
182
892
347
661
1,008
9,049
Total Internal
33
33
67
80
80
160
1,415
Total Pass -by
19
8
28
28
38
66
583
Total "New Trips"
657
141
797
240
543
783
7050
hi addition to the trips relating to the specific background developments shown in
Tables la and 1b, existing traffic volumes were increased along study area roadways using
an historic growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually) through Year 2009 as
determined in the aforementioned WWW Property traffic study. Figure 4 shows the 2009
background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout the
study area. Figure 5 shows the corresponding 2009 background lane geometry and
AM/PM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets are
included in the Appendix section of this report.
PT4 �L L
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 7
0
0
P R+
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 8
0 0
11
•
Signalized
Intersection V
LOS = C(C)
C(C)
Route 50
FQ
Sig)
"Suggested
Intersection
LOS C(D)
Inte
Improvement"
Signelizalion
LOS
�A(B)
(C)C�
Signalized w-*
Route 622
Intersection
Unsignalized
Intersection
(B)II
LOS = B(C) `*
621
G
9
tc
G`
�p B(C)
(C)X 'YC
C
I
9 �r
Route 622
u
z
r
t
(011
Signalized
X 91
Intersection
LOS =C(C)
�g�
SITE q:I
�
V
o
S
37
"Sugg��
Improvement"
Signalization
a
Q
B(C)*
a(
Unsignalized Q
Intersection .Q^.
r
d �. Route 622
Unsignalized
Intersection
=P A
Figure 5
Phase 1: 2009 Background LOS S
P + i
C
Signalized
Intersection
LOS C(D)
�®
C(D)
=
(C)C�
Signalized w-*
Route 50
! No Scale
Intersection
' 1 0
LOS = B(C) `*
G r°B(C)
4.
9
tc
lC)B C
� r
621 *
(C)X 'YC
C
9 �r
Byeh `_t(8)a
u
Unsignalized
Intersection
.� Unsignalized
G Intersection
B(C)
DlExtfarl "!,_ y pve
* Zdcd
��g 1
C(D)
q
Intersection
LOS = C(C)
Signalized
Intersection
LOS = B(C)
G
*(B)A� e W Cree
Grade
Unsignalized
Denotes Free -Flow Lane Intersection
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
Denotes new intersections
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 9
�J
0
PHASE 1 TRIP GENERATION
0
PHR +A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using
equations and rates provided in the 7` Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers'
(ITE) Trip Generation Report Table 2 was prepared to summarize the trip generation
associated with the Phase 1 Willow Run development.
Table 2
Proposed Development: Willow Run
Phase 1 TriD Generation Summary
•
•
ITE Land Use Amount
Code
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ADT
In
Out
Total
In
Out I
Total
210 Single Family Detached 260 units
230 Single Family Attached 339 units
48
23
144
114
191
137
160
110
94
54
253
164
2
Total
71
257
329
269
148
417
PHASE 1 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network
surrounding the proposed site. PHR +A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in
Figure 6 to assign the Phase 1 Willow Run trips (Table 2) throughout the study area
roadway network. Figure 7 shows the respective Phase 1 development - generated AM/PM
peak hour trips and ADT assignments.
PHASE 12009 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS
The Phase 1 Willow Run assigned trips (Figure 7) were added to the 2009
background traffic volumes (Figure 4) to obtain 2009 Phase 1 build -out conditions. Figure
S shows Phase 1 2009 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key
locations throughout the study area. Figures 9a and 9b show the respective Phase 1 2009
build -out lane geometry and levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets
are included in the Appendix section of this report.
PT4R + A
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 10
0 0
0
Residential
Figure 6
P�A + i
Phase 1: Trip Distribution Percentages
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page I I
• •
0
A -14
No Scale */!(A= 13(7)
r
%.52(30)
}m 13(7)
��Routt
Ir
� NU��a, WO
r -
•
0
1{
B
ry ��
1 d l 2 13(7)
I
*/1
4 e"
SITE
%.13(7)
4-39(2
RoW
H
7'
N
'A
�L
a ,r
l
1
�
~4 4'175)
Ruby Ave
b
� �
1
a
A
'v aI
4(13
(
`)131
X3 (11
�
1.
A•
'A
,�
E e
Peak Hour)
0 New Intersection
Phase 1: Development - Generated Trip Assignments
1
Figure 7
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 12
0
0
qy b o
b
�tic
✓1
�+ 1047(159
� 291(770)
No Scale
X
Ar 184(2Cn
4 (23)
s BfirLl9( �7q)
(
1.299
4-796
Ro
c �N
n
ta
0
�343)3
r y �
4 �o (0) } Han dley
((0) X 46(175) it, pylj Ave
Exren Y t
day
ti
SITE F f6 G a
a'
> y $ (4
1 6g) l8
(jlO
�
J� �41� (•1144) ,� ✓���
( 61j4 �A �.. (163)2 r�
622 ( s' (388)595�� �/►
Cedar Ct (299)7751 n"'�
•
31(80)
,f 1 4 63(171)
75(116)
(79)71...* r
(
ti
1 ^ gyp �
x.47(195)
�svtnai
�r iEi v
o ® AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
New Intersection
G rade
- r V
Figure 8 Phase 1: 2009 Build -out ADT and AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
��
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 13
0
•
•
0
No
;P RA.
Figure 9a Phase 1: 2009 Build -out LOS (Proffered Improvements)
Pub
a{ Denotes new intersections
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 14
0
r�
•
0
0
Signalized
"Suggested
Inlersectton V
LOS = C(C)
lnlersection
�i°A(B)
T C(C)
Signalized
LOS =li )
Route 50
„
LOS = B(C)
Signalized
"Suggested
lnlersection
�i°A(B)
Improvement"
Signaliration
Signalized
LOS =li )
Intersection
„
LOS = B(C)
Ro to 622
z
Unsignalized
p
LOS = C(C)
Intersection
B)B 4
VJ
/
e
c
�y�
Route 622
B�
Signalized
o6aio
Intersection
„
LOS = B(C)
1
a
B(C)+
+ (B)B �
Unsignalized Q
Intersection Q
+
k�
� k 7A(A)`
Route 622
Unsignalized
Intersection
m
A
Signalized
Intersection
LOS = C(D)
Stgnalized
Intersection �®
LOS =B(C)
G �B(C)
t
%t
I 77.�
h
�m Rot
No Scale I
.
( U)B n
Intersection f\ )
LOS = B(C) (C)n , ° I P
"Suggested
Im m
proveent" D G
WB -IThru J m G
Denotes Free -Flow Lane
* Denotes critical unsignalized movemen
Peak Hour) Q Denotes new intersections
_.r - H ier V
Figure 9b Phase 1: 2009 Build -out LOS (w/ Suggested Regional Improvements
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June
T u 1 i l Page 15
1S
Unsignalized
Intersection
I
t
SITE /
c
�y�
C(D)
3
p
o6aio
Signalized
9c,
ction
z
p
LOS = C(C)
ti
Intersection
J
G LOS = Cm)
t Creek
622
.*�
(C)B�
Signalized
"ac
4
e/�O
i B(C)*
P Intersection
�G •� LOS =B(D)
1
+(B) A
4
edar Creek
V
Unsignalized
Grade
G �
T
1 \
Intersection
Signalized
B (C
0
+— Unsignalized
P Intersection
AM Peak Hour(I
rC Unsignalized
Intersection
,q
Signalized
FEB
ction
Improvem e nt"
-1 RigM1l
LOS = C(C)
Oftft
(D,Cz
i B(C)*
Ye
9 9
n
L
PHASE 2 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS (2012)
•
Phase 2 (full build -out) is analyzed assuming the anticipated future roadway
network improvements described in Phase 1 as well as the following infrastructure
improvements: 1) Completion of the Jubal Early Drive Extended to Route 37, 2)
Completion of a diamond interchange at the intersection of Merrimans Lane/Route 37 and
3) Realignment of Merrimans Lane north of the new Merrimans Lane/Route 37
interchange.
2012 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
In order to accurately depict future conditions within the study area, PHR+A
utilized A Trafc Impact Analvsis of the WWW Property by PHR +A, dated December 5,
2002 to determine the trips associated with not yet completed area developments:. Based
upon the 7 th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation
Report and the aforementioned traffic study, Tables 3a and 3b are provided to summarize
the calculated trips associated with each of the 2012 "other developments ".
Table 3a
Background Development: WWW Property
Trip Generation Summary
•
ITE
AM Peak flour
PM Peak
Hour
ADT
Code
Land Use
Amount
In
Out
I Total
In I
Out
I Total
750
Office Park
5 acres
350
30
381
34
194
229
2241
813
Discount Superstore
135,000 SF
127
122
248
252
262
514
6030
820
Shopping Center
25,000 SF
42
27
68
120
130
251
2758
Total
519
179
697
406
587
993
11,028
Total Internall
34
34
68
83
83
165
1,898
Total Pass -by
25
22
47
56
59
115
1318
Total "New Trips"
459
122
582
1 268
445
713
1 7812
PT_T + t
ILL
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 16
E
•
•
�1
9
Table 3b
Background Development: Valley Health Systems and Degrange Properties
Trio Generation Summary
ITE
AM
Peak Hour
PM
Peak Hour
Code
Land Use
Amount
ADT
In Out 1 Total
In Out Total
Valle - v Health Systems Property
150
Warehousing (Distribution Center)
5 acres
63
25
88
26
48
73
383
710
Office
50,000 SF
95
13
108
23
112
135
782
750
Office Park
5 acres
350
30
381
34
194
229
2241
620
Nursing Home
24,000 SF
6
3
9
5
5
10
146
252
Elderly Housing - Attach
80 units
3
4
6
5
3
9
278
Sub -total
517
75
592
93
363
456
3831
Degrange Property
312
Business Hotel
50 rooms
17
12
29
19
12
31
364
760
Research & Development Park
5 acres
70
13
84
9
68
77
398
820
Shopping Center
25,000 SF
43
27
70
121
131
252
2795
912
Drive -in Bank
2,400 SF
17
13
30
55
55
110
694
932
H -T Restaurant
7,600 SF
46
42
88
51
32
83
966
Sub -total
192
108
300
154
298
552
5218
Total
709
182
892
347
661
1,008
1 9,049
Total Internal
33
33
67
80
80
160
1,415
Total Pass -by
19
8
28
28
38
66
583
Total "New Trips"
657
141
797
240
543
783
7050
In addition to the trips relating to the specific background developments shown in
Tables 3a and 3b, existing traffic volumes were increased along study area roadways using
an historic growth rate of 5% per year (compounded annually) through Year 2012 as
determined in the aforementioned WWW Property traffic study. Figure 10 shows the
2012 background ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations throughout
the study area. Figures 11a and 11b show the corresponding 2012 background lane
geometry and AM/PM peak hour levels of service. HCS -2000 levels of service worksheets
are provided in the Appendix section of this report.
P +
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 17
0
0
0
PH A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
R+A June 22, 2006
Page 19
•
•
11
•
No Scale
1 818
B(B)
Signalized
Intersection
LOS = B(B)
4
621
✓ ubal,
i
SITE a
Ie
>t
a!
C
0
LOS = A(A)
D
Q Denotes new intersections
* Denotes critical unsignalized movemew
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
- 1 "HltL l
Figure Ila P hase 2: 2012 Back LOS (Proffered Improvements)
Pt, + d
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 19
9 0
0
Signalized
Intersection
LOS = INC
Signalized c
Intersection 4—
LOS = Clot 4-- C(D)
1 *� Rou
Signalized (D)Cv,,.�
Intersection �► G �!/
LOS =B(C)
q� t4a
4 B
No Scale I
621
•(B)B
J*
Pp woo
Signalized
Intersection �.s
LOS =B(C) A(C)
jj++ Route 62:
(C)B Ay v-...*
Intersection
Unsignalized
Intersection
Signalized
Y Interseclion
LOS =B(C)
"Suggested
Improve t"
signalization
Sit -1 Rieht
II
•
0/1
Q
%
t uAl I
Unsignalized ed t
Intersection
C(C)
�1 a Route 50
'Suggested
SITE
r� I tersection
"Suggested
Improvement"
Signalized
Ell. • 1 Right
Intersection
NB - 1 Thra
LOS = C(C)
SB • 1 Right
v
1
0oz
t C(C)
BB*
(�,1 3jjr
Ez1d
Signalized
Intersection
A G6
LOS = C(D) 4,
G�
J
Q
a`7�
,
Gq L0
m
�►
Signalized
Inter section
}��
1
=
I LOS = C(n)
G QD)
1
�
G
/ 1
*(B)A jA edar Cn
Grade
\ Unsignalized
Intersection /
A I._._I1 \.L t
Fig�ur 11b Phase 2: 2012 Background LOS (w/ Suggested Regional
P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 20
LOS ° B(Q ( Cm `► >
07V 7A(A)* *(g)A �1 Route 622 Improvement ` y
Route 622 4 G E - I Thru ) e
Unsi nalized WB -1 Thrit J L
Intersection a * Un e r sec i on
�Po � Intersection Denotes Free-Flow Lane
* Denotes critical unsignalized
_T) 1 ^ AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour) Q Denotes new intersections
B(C)
jjr
•
PHASE 2 TRIP GENERATION
•
PHR+A determined the number of trips entering and exiting the site using
equations and rates provided in the 7` Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers'
(ITE) Trip Generation Report Table 4 was prepared to summarize the trip generation
associated with Phase 2 (complete build -out) of the Willow Run development.
Table 4
Proposed Development: Willow Run
Phase 2 Trin Generation Snmmary
•
r1
L
ITE
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ADT
Land Use Amount
In I
Out I
Total
al
Code
210 Single Family Detached 425 units
77
230
307
4,250
220 Apartment 416 units
42
166
208
6
2,496
230 Single Family Attached 490 units
31
153
184
r146
1
4,263
252 Elderly Housing - Attached 108
4
5
9
376
710 Office 150,000 SF
228
31
259
7
1823
820 Retail 225,000 SF
155
99
255
513
69
11504
Total
537
684
1,221
1,119
1,071
2,190
24,712
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The distribution of trips was based upon local travel patterns for the road network
surrounding the proposed site. PHR +A utilized the trip distribution percentages shown in
Figure 12 to assign the Phase 2 Willow Run trips (Table 4) throughout the study area.
Figure 13 shows the corresponding development - generated AM/PM peak hour trips and
ADT assignments.
2012 BUILD -OUT CONDITIONS
The Willow Run assigned trips (Figure 13) were then added to the 2012
background volumes (Figure 10) to obtain 2012 build -out conditions. Figure 14 shows
2012 Phase 2 build -out ADT and AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes at key locations
throughout the study area. Figures 15a and 15b show the corresponding 2012 build -out
lane geometry and AMIPM peak hour levels of service. All HCS -2000 levels of service
worksheets are included in the Appendix section of this report.
P
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 21
0
0
F Figure 12
Phase 2: Trip Distribution Percentages
P + d
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 22
�I 51
ti •
l
�1
4
031(113)
28)]91
J
h
621
No Scale
L
•
w
SITE yJ «/�
�J
010-0J %� ,x. 50(]41)
q - es5 -'�M O3 9 fi
I�
���u'x�a " ♦���R 4-46(84)
♦� 4®55(31) 4�0.� edar Cn
✓ ~28(15) *0 Route 622 ' *�,(' ` N$ "' (92}tl� Grade
r (2s)8,
)8--* Route 622
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
g C
New Intersection Round -about
1
1 A
1 H1LL l
Figure 13 Development- Generated Trip Assignments
P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 23
4
28(15)
28)]91
p /r—►
I�
���u'x�a " ♦���R 4-46(84)
♦� 4®55(31) 4�0.� edar Cn
✓ ~28(15) *0 Route 622 ' *�,(' ` N$ "' (92}tl� Grade
r (2s)8,
)8--* Route 622
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
g C
New Intersection Round -about
1
1 A
1 H1LL l
Figure 13 Development- Generated Trip Assignments
P � A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 23
9 0
0
0
Pules
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 24
�J
C ,
E
lJ
E
PH �1 .
Figure 15a
2012 Build -out LOS (Proffered Improvements)
PuRl i
Denotes new intersections
* Denotes critical unsignalized movement
AM Peak Hour(PM Peak Hour)
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
June 22, 2006
Page 25
0 0
0
•
•
Signalized
Intersection
LOS = D(C)
Signalized
Intersection
LOS =B(C) A(C)
Route 62
I Improvement"
Signalizalion
Sit - I Right
(C : k�W�
B Unsignalized
Intersection
(jout *7A(A)
R 622
nsignalized
ntersection
A —
� V J
(E) \I Signalized
t� %! I Intersection
LOS = CIE)
l ply e �
edar Creek v�
Grade v�
Interse ction stud
I
ntersction Signalized
Peak
Intersection
C�
A Route
4.VB(C
( C)B �► >
Q
=
622
B
Signalized
)
Intersection
,
LOS = B(C)
I Improvement"
Signalizalion
Sit - I Right
(C : k�W�
B Unsignalized
Intersection
(jout *7A(A)
R 622
nsignalized
ntersection
A —
� V J
(E) \I Signalized
t� %! I Intersection
LOS = CIE)
l ply e �
edar Creek v�
Grade v�
Interse ction stud
I
ntersction Signalized
Peak
Intersection
LOS = B(C)
"Suggested
( C)B �► >
Q
=
��
Improvement"
EB
)
G
-1Thru
1
wB . I Thn,
J
G
Denotes Free -Flow Lane
* Denotes critical unshmalized movemen
_r
Figure 15b 2012 Build -out LOS (w/ Suggested Regional Improvements)
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
P /� June 22, a 2 6
�� � Page 26
Signalized 1�
Intersection
C` �• LOS = C(D) 4-- C(D)
[
d-M 11 ' ..� Route SD
°� No Scale
�
/ Route 50 Signalised (D)C" 4
(D)ti ° Intersection 1�
LOS =B(C)
N
rB(C)
621 f i�
lite 50 "(C)BJi y
�A 47 9J+
(C)B C Unsignalized
+ - J Intersection 'Suggested
"Suggested Q Improvement"
'.mprovemeM" AQ Signalized EB.1 Right
Signalization B �] lnterwction NB - 1 Theo,
T ee ( B)a LOS = C(C) SB . 1 Right
�n rd a
eL ❑ p�
A
37 c> �1 G� C' L
Internalized `y
Intersection ,_ * �J's' «OC(C)
Unsignalized
Intersection G ( C)C�
621 'tuba /p�,l �E)rid Signalized
Intersection
LOS = C(E) SC'1
F L6 G�
a [ Cil ( d a® C(E)
Al
a F
IN jr
�m
*(B)AJI 1P �lcouu:
�/ +Unsignalized
�W F Intersection
4
AM Peak Hour(P
0 0
•
CONCLUSIONS
The traffic impacts associated with the proposed Willow Run development are
acceptable and manageable. For Phase 1 and Phase 2, PHR +A has provided the following
conclusions as well as "suggested improvement measures" that are required to achieve
levels of service "C" or better per the Frederick County minimum standards. For
unsignalized intersections with levels of service "D ", traffic signalization is not suggested
since traffic signalization warrants would not be satisfied.
2009 Phase 1 - As shown in Figure 9b, all existing intersections except Jubal Early
DriveNalley Avenue, Cedar Creek Grade/Route 11, Cedar Creek Grade/Route 37
interchange ramps and Cedar Creek Grade/Harvest Drive, will maintain levels of
service "C" or better during 2009 Phase 1 build -out conditions (Improvements are
shown at the intersection of Route 50/Route 37 interchange ramps since upgrades
are currently underway). PHR+A has provided Figure 9a to show the "Proffered
improvements ". "Suggested regional improvements" are shown in Figure 9b to
maintain acceptable levels of service during 2009 build -out conditions.
2012 Phase 2 - As shown in Figure 15b, all existing intersections except Jubal
• Early DriveNalley Avenue, Cedar Creek Grade/Route 11, Cedar Creek
Grade/Route 37 interchange ramps, Cedar Creek Grade/Merrimans Lane and Cedar
Creek Grade/Harvest Drive, will maintain levels of service "C" or better during
Phase 2 2012 build -out conditions (Improvements are shown at the intersection of
Route 50/Route 37 interchange ramps since upgrades are currently underway).
Each of the aforementioned intersections, except the intersection of Cedar Creek
Grade/Merrimans Lane, will maintain unacceptable levels of service during
background and build -out conditions. PHR +A has provided Figure 11 a and Figure
15a to show the "Proffered improvements" and Figure l lb and Figure 15b to show
the "suggested regional improvements" for 2012 background and build -out
conditions, respectively.
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
1 L A June 22, 2006
Page 27
• Willow Run Traditional Neighborhood Design Transportation Enhancements
The Applicants' proffer statement has been designed to address the transportation impacts
associated with the build -out of the residential and commercial land uses for the Willow
Run Traditional Neighborhood Design Community, and to assist in the mitigation of
several regional transportation issues that are a result of other developments and projected
traffic volume increases. These proffered transportation improvements include the
following:
Proffered Transportation Improvement Program
•
Completely fund and construct the four -lane divided section of Jubal Early Drive
from the current terminus in City of Winchester to the intersection serving the
eastern neighborhood commercial land bays prior to issuance of the 300
residential building permit.
•
Completely fund and construct the four -lane divided section of Jubal Early Drive
from the eastern neighborhood commercial land bays to the first commercial
center intersection prior to issuance of 450 residential building permit.
•
Completely fund and construct the four -lane divided section of Jubal Early Drive
from the terminus of the first commercial center intersection to the Route 37
northbound on and off ramps prior to issuance of 600 residential building
permit.
e
•
Completely fund and construct the new Route 37 /Jabal Early Drive interchange
northbound and southbound on and off ramps using the existing bridge structure
prior to the issuance of the 600 residential building permit.
•
Completely fund and construct the realignment of approximately 1,000 feet of the
two -lane section of Merriman's Lane (Route 621) to the north of Juba] Early
Drive to create a "T" intersection prior to issuance of 800 residential building
permit.
•
Completely fund and construct a roundabout at the Route 37 southbound on and
off ramps, or execute a signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund traffic
signalization at the Route 37 southbound on and off ramps.
•
Execute a signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund traffic signalization
at the intersection of Jubal Early Drive and Meadow Branch Avenue.
•
Execute a signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund traffic signalization
at the intersection of Jubal Early Drive and the Merriman's Lane north
realignment at the commercial center intersection.
•
Execute a signalization agreement with VDOT to fully fund traffic signalization
at the intersection of Cedar Creek Grade and Birchmont Drive.
•
Completely fund and construct right and left turn lanes at the intersection of
Cedar Creek Grade and Birchmont Drive.
•
Allow the developer construction dollars to be utilized as matching funds
unconditionally by Frederick County for additional transportation system
improvements.
•
A Revised Phased Traffic Impact Analysis of Willow Run
H
PPA June 22, 2006
Page 28