SOUTHERN YORK COUNTY

 

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STUDY

 

 

 

 

Prepared for

 

York County Planning Commission

York County, PA

 

 

 

 

Prepared by:

 

 

445 West Philadelphia Street

P.O. Box 15040

York, PA 17405-7040

 

 

September 1, 2002

 

 

Prepared by:

 

 

 

______________________________________________

Mark L. Henise, P.E.

Traffic Engineer

 

Under the direction of:

 

 

 

______________________________________________

Thomas M. Smith, P.E.

Project Manager


 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

I.          Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1

 

II.         Study Area...................................................................................................................... 3

 

III.       Current Conditions.......................................................................................................... 4

 

IV.       Land Use and Zoning Inventory Analysis.......................................................................... 4

 

V.        Analysis of Existing Traffic Conditions.............................................................................. 4

 

            APPENDICES............................................................................................................... 9

 

 

            List of Appendices

 

A         Level of Service Summary Sheets

B          Manual Turning Movement Count Data

C         Automatic Traffic Recorder Count Data

D         Accident Data

E          Highway Capacity Software Analyses

F          Meeting Minutes

 

 

 


I.          Introduction

 

            The purpose of this study is to provide the York County Planning Commission and the local municipalities involved with a report that identifies improvements to the surrounding transportation system to address existing deficiencies and mitigate impacts of future development.  This report can then be used for submission to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) for inclusion of some or all of the recommended improvements on the Department’s 12-year plan.

 

            Another goal of this study is to enhance the existing York County GIS database by adding information collected while conducting the study and conclusions reached as a result of the study.  Some the information to be added includes, but is not limited to public and private transportation systems, roadway classification systems, digital photographs, accident data, planned or potential development sites, and projected future intersection levels-of-service (LOS).

 

II.        Study Area

 

            The study area includes intersections and roadway corridors within the following municipalities:

 

§         Hopewell Township

§         Shrewsbury Township

§         Codorus Township

§         North Codorus Township

§         Stewartstown Borough

§         Shrewsbury Borough

§         Railroad Borough

§         New Freedom Borough

§         Glen Rock Borough

§         Jefferson Borough

§         York New Salem Borough

 

            All of the above-mentioned municipalities, along with the York County Planning Commission and the Southern School District were active participants in the study.  The South Eastern School District and the Spring Grove School District also provided information for use in the study.

 

            During the initial stages of the study, a Task Force was formed, comprised of representatives from the participating municipalities and the Southern School District.  The primary function of the Task Force was to oversee the consultant’s progress while conducting the study and to ensure that the study properly addresses the concerns of the individual municipalities and the Southern York County Regional Planning Commission.  The members of the Task Force are as follows:

 

§         Will Clark (York County Planning Commission)

§         Rich Zambito (Glen Roack Borough)

§         Robb Green (Jefferson Borough)

§         Nelson Brenneman (North Codorus Township)

§         George Smith (Shrewsbury Borough)

§         Samuel Lentz (Shrewsbury Township)

§         Patrick Fero (Shrewsbury Township/SYCRPC)

§         Guy Gilbert (Hopewell Township)

§         Dennis Sarpan (New Freedom Borough)

§         Wayne McCullough (Southern School District)

 

            The task force met November 27, 2001, along with Tom Smith of Buchart-Horn, Inc., to finalize the intersections and roadway corridors to be studied.  The list developed at that meeting is as follows:

 

                        Intersections

 

§         Plank Road (SR 2074) and PA Route 24 (SR 0024)

§         Plank Road and Mount Airy Road (SR 2097)

§         PA Route 516 (SR 0516) and Hanover Street/York Street (SR 3041)

§         PA Route 616 (SR 0616) and PA Route 851 (SR 0851)

§         Susquehanna Trail (SR 3001) and Campbell Road (SR 3002)

§         Susquehanna Trail and Windy Hill Road (SR 2078)

§         Susquehanna Trail and Clearview Drive (SR 3006)

§         Plank Road and Rinely Road (T-???)

§         Susquehanna Trail and Constitution Avenue (SR 3007)

§         Susquehanna Trail and PA 851

§         Windy Hill Road and PA 851

§         PA Route 616 and Fissels Church Road (SR 3011)

§         PA Route 216 (SR 0216) and Church Street (SR 3008)

§         Susquehanna Trail and Plank Road

§         PA Route 616 and PA Route 216

§         PA Route 616 and George Street (SR 3042)

§         PA Route 851 and PA Route 516

§         PA Route 216 and PA Route 516

 

                        Corridors

 

§         PA Route 616

§         PA Route 516 (Jefferson Borough to PA Route 216)

§         PA Route 851

§         Plank Road (Susquehanna Trail to PA Route 24)

§         Constitution Avenue/Truck 851

§         Windy Hill Road (Susquehanna Trail to PA Route 851)

§         Fissels Church Road (PA Route 216 to PA Route 616)

§         Clearview Road (Susquehanna Trail to PA Route 616)

§         Mount Airy Road (PA Route 851 to Plank Road)

§         PA Route 216 (Glen Rock Borough to PA Route 516)

 

 

III.             Current Conditions

 

After the study area was finalized, Buchart-Horn, Inc. (BH) conducted a field inventory of all roadways and intersections within the study area.  The field inventory consisted of sketching all unsignalized intersections, measuring roadway and shoulder width, noting lane uses and traffic control devices, taking digital photographs, and verifying that all signalized intersections were operating in compliance with the current PennDOT Traffic Signal Permit Plan.

 

While conducting the field inventory, BH noted that intersection of PA Route 516 and York Street/Hanover Street at the square in Jefferson Borough would have to be treated as four separate intersections for the purposes of a manual traffic count due to the size of the traffic circle.  BH also noted the recent curb and sidewalk improvements and the apparent historic nature of the traffic circle.  Therefore we contacted Will Clark, of the York County Planning Commission, regarding the likelihood that improvements (i.e. removal of traffic circle and installation of a traffic signal) would be made at this location.  We suggested that one of the alternate intersections be considered because it would not be cost-effective to study the intersection if it was unlikely that any improvements would be implemented.  Will contacted a representative of Jefferson Borough and it was decided that this intersection not be counted.  Instead, the intersection of the Susquehanna Trail and Stewartstown Road (SR 2076) was added to the study area in its place.

 

BH then instructed Tri-State Traffic Data, Inc. (Tri-State) the conduct the manual traffic counts at 13 of the intersections within the study area.  Tri-State did the manual counts from Tuesday December 11, 2001 through Thursday December 13, 2001.  They collected the count data from 6:00 to 9:00 am and from 3:00 to 6:00 pm.  The counts classified passenger cars and heavy vehicles.  The York County Planning Commission conducted the manual traffic counts at the remaining intersections within the traffic impact area on Tuesday, December 4, Wednesday, December 5, and Wednesday, December 12, 2001.  Those counts were also done during the same time periods and classified passenger cars and heavy vehicles.  The manual turning movement count data is included in Appendix B.

 

Tri-State also collected the 24-hour automatic traffic recorder data at 10 locations along 6 of the corridors within the study area.  The counts were conducted for a one-week time period from Monday, December 10, through Monday December 17, 2001.  These counts included one truck classification count along each of the 6 corridors.  The York County Planning Commission collected the 24-hour automatic traffic recorder data at the remaining locations in the study area during the same approximate time frame.  The automatic traffic recorder data is included in Appendix C.

 

 

 

Table 1 - Road Network Description

 

 

Road

 

 

Ownership

Width of

Roadway/

Shoulders (ft)

 

ADT

(veh/day)

 

Speed

Limit

 

PA Route 616

SR 0616

22.0/4.0

2,465

35/50 mph

 

PA Route 516

SR 0516

22.0/3.0

2,270

45 mph

 

PA Route 851

SR 0851

21.0/3.0

 

25/30/35 mph

 

Plank Road

SR 2027

22.0/2.0-4.0

5,400

35/40/45 mph

 

Constitution Ave. (Truck 851)

SR 3007

22.0/3.0

6,020

35/40 mph

 

Windy Hill Road

SR 2097

20.0

1,400

35 mph

 

Fissels Church Road

SR 3011

21.0/2.0

2,870

40 mph

 

Clearview Road

SR 3006

19.0-21.0

1,000

35/40 mph

 

Mt. Airy Road

SR 2097

21.0/2.0

6,600

45 mph

 

PA Route 216

SR 0216

21.0/2.0

3,360

45 mph

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            BH contacted Rabbit Transit, the Southern School District, South Eastern School District and Spring Grove School District to obtain information on existing or proposed bus routes that travel along the study corridors, through study intersections, or pass through any of the municipalities participating in the study.  These bus routes are shown on an overlay that has been added to the York County GIS database.

 

            BH also contacted the PennDOT Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering to obtain accident data for any reportable accidents occurring along the study corridors or at any of the study intersections from 1996 through 2000.  A reportable accident is defined as an accident that results in personal injury or one that requires one or more vehicles be towed from the scene of the accident.  This data was then analyzed to identify any trends in accident type, cause of accident, time of day, roadway conditions, etc.  The accident data is included in Appendix D.

 

IV.              Land Use and Zoning Inventory Analysis

 

 

 

 

 

V.                 Analysis of Existing Traffic Conditions

 

A.        Capacity Analysis

 

            Highway capacity analysis uses Level of Service (LOS) to qualitatively relate capacity to operational conditions.  LOS ranges from "A" to "F", with "A" being the best operating condition and "F" being the worst.  Generally, LOS C or better is desirable, but in areas with substantial traffic congestion or flows, LOS D is also considered acceptable.  The capacity analysis was conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in the latest Highway Capacity Manual.

 

            LOS for unsignalized intersections is measured by average total delay in seconds per vehicle (sec/veh).  Table 2 provides a correlation between LOS and average total delay for unsignalized intersections.

 

            LOS for signalized intersections is measured by average stopped delay per vehicle.  The volume to capacity ratio (v/c) relates the peak hour traffic volumes to the theoretical maximum traffic volumes that the intersection can process under ideal conditions.  Table 3 shows level of service criteria for signalized intersections.

 

            Utilizing the methodology described, capacity analysis was performed on the intersections within the TIA for each peak period during the existing (2001) scenario.  LOS summary sheets are provided in Appendix A and the capacity analysis printouts are provided in Appendix E.

 

 

 

Table 2 - Level of Service Criteria, Unsignalized Intersections

Level of

Service

Average Total Delay

(sec/veh)

A

<10.0

B

>10.0 and <15.0

C

>15.0 and <25.0

D

>25.0 and <35.0

E

>35.0 and <50.0

F

>50.0

 


 

Table 3 - Level of Service Criteria, Signalized Intersections

Level of

Service

Description

Average Stopped Delay

(sec/veh)

A

Very low delay, good progression; most vehicles do not stop at intersection

<10.0

B

Generally good signal progression and/or short cycle length; more vehicles stop at intersection than LOS A

10.1 to 20.0

C

Fair progression and/or longer cycle length; significant number of vehicles stop at intersection.

20.1 to 35.0

D

Congestion becomes noticeable; individual cycle failures; longer delays from unfavorable progression, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios; most vehicles stop at intersection.

35.1 to 55.0

E

Considered limit of acceptable delay, indicative of poor progression, long cycle length, high volume/capacity ratio; frequent individual cycle failures.

55.1 to 80.0

F

Unacceptable delay, frequently an indication of oversaturation (i.e., arrival flow exceeds available capacity).

>80.0

 

 

            B.        Crash Analysis

 

            BH obtained crash data from the PennDOT Bureau of Traffic Safety and Highway Engineering for crashes occurring along the study corridors and at the study intersections from 1996 through 2000.  This data was then analyzed to determine crash rates, injury rates, and fatality rates along segments of the study corridors.  The rates were calculated per million vehicle-miles traveled for each of the segments.  These rates are shown on Table 4 along with the percentage of total accidents that involved a vehicle hitting a fixed object (i.e. curb, tree, utility pole, fence, parked vehicle, etc.).

 

            These calculated rates were then compared with statewide averages provided in the 2000 edition of Pennsylvania Crash Facts and Statistics.  In the year 2000 the statewide rates was 1.44 reportable crashes per million vehicle-miles and 1.48 deaths per 100 million vehicle-miles (0.0148 per million vehicle-miles).  The same rates for crashes on state-owned highways, not including interstate highways, during the year 2000 were 1.49 crashes per million vehicle-miles and 1.83 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles (0.0183 per million vehicle-miles).  For the purpose of comparison, the later rates will be used because all of the study corridors are state-owned highways.

 

            Serious injury rates were also calculated and are shown on Table 4.  For the purposes of this study, a serious injury is one that was reported as a major injury or moderate injury.  The statewide rate for serious injuries is 0.29 per million vehicle-miles.  At locations where the calculated rates for the study corridors exceed the statewide averages, the rates are highlighted on Table 4.  Finally, 33.6% of all accidents that occurred statewide in 2000 involved a vehicle hitting a fixed object.  At the locations where this percentage is exceeded the percentages are highlighted on Table 4.

 

            The data was also analyzed to determine crash rates, injury rates, and fatality rates for crashes occurring at each of the study intersections.  Rates were calculated per million vehicles passing through each intersection.  There are no statewide rates available for crashes occurring at intersections, however the rates provide a means of comparing the study intersections to one another.

 

            At the following seven study intersections, four or fewer crashes were reported over the past five years:

 

§         Susquehanna Trail and Plank Road

§         PA Route 216 and Church Street

§         PA Route 516 and PA Route 216

§         Susquehanna Trail and Windy Hill Road

§         Plank Road and PA Route 24

§         Plank Road and Mount Airy Road

§         Plank Road and Rinely Road

 

            The crashes that occurred at the remaining study intersections were also analyzed to identify any trends that exist regarding the type of crash and/or the direction of travel of the vehicles involved in the crash.  At the intersection of Susquehanna Trail and Constitution Avenue 5 of the 20 crashes were rear-end crashes involving northbound vehicles, just north of the intersection.

 

            At the intersection of PA Route 851 and Windy Hill Road, where a total of 12 crashes occurred, 5 crashes involved vehicles turning left from Windy Hill Road.  Three of those vehicles struck the guiderail on the north side of the intersection and two were struck by eastbound vehicles on PA Route 851.

 

            A total of nine crashes occurred at the intersection of Susquehanna Trail and Clearview Drive.  Three of those crashes were rear-end crashes involving southbound vehicles and three crashes involved westbound vehicles on Clearview Drive not stopping at the stop sign and colliding with vehicles on Susquehanna Trail.

 

            At the intersections of PA Route 616 and PA Route 851 and PA Route 616 and Fissels Church Road, four of the eight total crashes that occurred at each intersection involved vehicles hitting fixed objects.

 

            A total of eight crashes occurred at the intersection of PA Route 616 and PA Route 216 (Manchester Street).  Six of those eight crashes involved vehicles traveling northbound on Manchester Street.

 

            A total of seven crashes occurred at the intersection of PA Route 851 and PA Route 516.  Three of those intersections involved eastbound vehicles on PA Route 516 colliding with southbound vehicles.

 

........... There are no apparent trends at the intersection of PA Route 616 and George Street.