b carli ri r d sle g pike b(b) c a r l is l e p i k e · figure # 2.7 level of service – existing...
TRANSCRIPT
FIGURE # 2.7 Level of Service –
Existing Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
LEGEND
ORRS
BRID
GE
RD
CARLISLE PIKE
CARLISLE PIKE
TRINDLE
RD
ST
JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
TRINDLE
RD
INDUSTRIA
LPARK RD
RA
ILR
OA
DA
VE
CE
NT
RA
LB
LV
D
HARRISBURG EXPRESSWAY
SP
OR
TIN
GH
ILL
RD
SH
EELY
LN
GIL
MO
RE
RD
641
11
MA
TC
H T
O IN
SE
T
MATCH TO NEXT SHEET
B(B)
D(F)
E(E)C(C)
C(D)
B(B)
f(d)
C(D)
f(f)
TRINDLE
RD
CARLISLE PIKE
15
32
ND
ST
MA
TC
H T
O A
BO
VE
D(F)
F(F)
B(C)
C(D)
c(d)
Signalized Intersection Overall Level of Service AM (PM)A(B)
d(e) Unsignalized Intersection Lowest Approach Level of Service am (pm)
d(f)
581
VA
NP
AT
TO
NR
D
GATEWAY
DR
SH
EELY
LN
WESLE
YD
RIV
E
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
GETTYSBURG
RO
AD
ST.JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
RA
ILR
OA
DA
VE
LO
CU
ST
ST
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
MAIN ST
MATCH TO PREVIOUS SHEET
FIGURE # 2.8 Level of Service –
Existing Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
LEGEND
D(D)
C(C)
B(C)
d(e)
f(f)f(f)
C(C)
Signalized Intersection Overall Level of ServiceA
d Unsignalized Intersection Lowest Approach Level of Service
SLATE
HIL
L
RO
AD
15
15
Existing Conditions
Page 35
2. O
-D Study
An O
rigin–Destination (O
-D) study w
as conducted within the C
LASH
study area to better understand the existing travel patterns.
Initially, the O-D
study was to be conducted at a lim
ited number of signalized intersections
(namely Trindle R
oad and St. John’s Church R
oad (#9) and Simpson Ferry R
oad and St. John’s C
hurch Road (#15)) to be cost-effective and to assure the safety of the m
otorist and surveyors. It w
as also assumed that the survey w
ould be conducted from 6:00A
M to
10:00AM
and 2:00PM to 6:00PM
to capture both comm
uter and comm
ercial vehicle travel.
In planning the O-D
study, several concerns arose. �
Concern w
ith the quality of data obtained. Often drivers do not know
street the address, roadw
ay names, or travel inform
ation to directly answer the survey
questions.�
Minim
al room available to stop vehicles along the shoulder; in som
e cases no shoulder is available.
�Safety concerns over having surveyors along the roadw
ay with the com
bination of narrow
lanes and high truck traffic. �
Concern w
ith driver frustration and in-cooperation; as the study area is already congested people m
ay view the survey as an intolerable delay.
�M
inimum
survey capture rate. It was estim
ated even if each surveyor interviewed 4
vehicles an hour, not even 1% of the traffic volum
e would be captured.
�M
inimum
survey capture rate for truck traffic. Due to the constrained survey
locations, driver cooperation, and survey rate; only a small fraction of truck traffic
data would be com
plied.
In working w
ith the West Shore Tax B
ureau, zip code information w
as obtained that linked local residence to their em
ployers and local employees to their residence. This data w
as applied using G
IS to determine how
comm
uters, generally automobile traffic, are accessing
the study area. The percent of employees traveling into the C
LASH
study area based on their hom
e zip code is shown in Figure 2.9.
With this additional inform
ation, a new approach w
as proposed to complete the O
-D study.
As sufficient inform
ation was know
n for the automobile travel patterns (significantly m
ore inform
ation than could have been obtained in the original interview O
-D study proposed)
the revised approach for the O-D
focused on truck travel patterns. In order to collect this data, a vehicle follow
ing method w
as proposed. Data collectors from
McC
ormick Taylor
and Design Support Services follow
ed trucks throughout the network, including trucks
entering and exiting Industrial Park Drive and R
ailroad Avenue. The data collection
process took place on Thursday May 31, 2007 from
7:00AM
to 12:00 PM and 1:00 PM
to 6:00 PM
. The trucks were follow
ed from the point that they entered the netw
ork (from U
S 15 or PA
581) until they reached their destination. Vehicles w
ere also followed from
Industrial Park D
rive and Railroad A
venue to the point where they exited the netw
ork onto
3937 (9.1
%)
2291 (5.3%)
3288 (7.6
%)
3554 (8
.2%
)677 (1.6%
)
1953 (4.5
%)
80 (0.2
%)
755 (1.7%)
60 (0.1%)
105 (0.2%)
298 (0.7
%)
18366
42.4%
7925
18.3%
York
Perry
Lancaster
Berks
Franklin
Adams
DauphinHuntingdon
Mifflin
Juniata
Schuylkill
Cumberland
Lebanon
Fulton
Chester
CecilCarroll HarfordWashington
Snyder
Frederick Baltimore
Northumberland
Centre
Morgan
Lehigh
M A R Y L A N DM A R Y L A N D
§̈¦83
§̈¦76
§̈¦176
§̈¦95
§̈¦283
§̈¦176
§̈¦83
§̈¦83
£¤522
£¤15
£¤11
£¤30
£¤222
£¤22
£¤40
£¤1
£¤322
£¤209
£¤422
£¤322
£¤22
£¤522
£¤522
£¤15
£¤422
£¤22
£¤22
£¤30
£¤209
£¤15
£¤22
£¤222
£¤222
£¤22
£¤22
£¤322
£¤15
£¤15
£¤322
£¤15
£¤30
£¤522
£¤40
£¤15
£¤222
£¤30
UV75
UV35
UV325
UV74
UV283
UV103
UV944
UV233
UV235
UV850
UV305
UV747
UV34
UV995
UV17
UV456
UV136
UV997
UV443
UV23
UV425
UV333
UV475
UV234
UV216
UV272
UV94
UV274
UV849
UV39
UV183
UV273
UV441
UV26
UV104
UV147
UV194
UV225
UV533
UV994
UV97
UV895
UV655
UV340
UV472
UV901
UV24
UV41
UV625
UV72
UV45
UV16
UV10
UV64
UV134
UV60
UV416
UV496
UV341
UV896
UV140
UV382
UV439
UV465
UV394
UV550
UV116
UV276
UV494
UV934
UV143
UV174
UV117
UV324
UV696
UV491
UV316
UV897
UV741
UV177
UV269
UV641
UV851
UV772
UV743
UV419
UV372
UV77
UV440UV543
UV125
UV462
UV516
UV501
UV921
UV616
UV165
UV545
UV61
UV343
UV433
UV829
UV238
UV25
UV645
UV418
UV68
UV114
UV230
UV241
UV124
UV181
UV76
UV623
UV57
UV624
UV30
UV12
UV999
UV27
UV62
UV172
UV724
UV928
UV86
UV182
UV926
UV646
UV722
UV568
UV56
UV662
UV832
UV73
UV144
UV214
UV58
UV2026
UV914
UV877
UV295
UV163
UV66
UV2003
UV841
UV796
UV562
UV887
UV3032
UV3055
UV338
UV913
UV161
UV737
UV213
UV309
UV813
UV422
UV275
UV621
UV92
UV805
UV199
UV1004
UV4005
UV771
UV410
UV846
UV222
UV34
UV616
UV443
UV10
UV443
UV655
UV305
UV850
UV72
UV16
UV416
UV897
UV997
UV241
UV34
UV235
UV72
UV10
UV997
UV896
UV324UV238
UV230
UV641
UV747
UV233
UV74
UV895
UV743
UV696
UV34
UV850
UV416
UV216
UV235
UV516
UV416
UV325
UV16
UV995
UV194
UV125
UV75
UV897
UV333
UV12
UV24
UV340
UV944
UV325
UV568
UV724
UV272
UV74
UV225
UV897
UV61
UV23
UV25
UV60
UV641
UV272
UV23
UV45
UV741
UV743
UV501
UV305
UV272
UV472
UV851
UV994
UV741UV897
UV234UV394
UV901
UV17
UV16
UV274
UV116
UV772
UV23
UV372
UV416
UV61
UV850
UV655
UV462
UV501
UV45
UV75
UV39
UV23
UV272
UV272
UV117
UV273
UV425
UV516
UV274
UV74
UV997
UV743
UV895
UV140
UV850
UV624
UV829
UV465
UV225
UV724
UV533
UV896
Hex
River
Cana l
Bull
Fro
nt
York
1005
3021
3rd
Derry
5th
30
19
Fru
i tvi lle
Pla nk
10
Laure
l
2nd
Davidsburg
Mid
dletow
n
Old York
Old
La
ke
Main
Admire
Lewisb
e
rry
11
th
Lucky
Elizab etht o
w
n
Turnpike
Krebs
H
icko
ry
6th
Irish Creek
Hain
Harrisburg
8th
N
ew
P
ar k
Furnace
Pinch
Valley
Free la
nd
7th
Fre
ysvi ll e
Blu
e H
ill
Big M
ount
I
dle
17th
Lingle
4th
D
uke
William Penn Perry Valle y
Wago
Park
Mountain
Lay
Cr a
ley
Moulstown
Gettys
burg
Elm
Vin
e
Junia
ta
Flin
tville
Ow l H
ollow
Butte
r
Brid
geto
n
Siddonsburg
Alp
ine
Arch R ock
Ho
bart
Ku
tzto
wn
Un
ion
Black R
ock
King
White Hall
Mill
12
th
Felto
n
19th
Bie
secke
r
Churc
h
Seto
n
Pin
e G
rove
Beckle ysv
ille
G
rays
tone
Gum
Tree
Penn
Lake
Meade
Sto
ne
y Poin
t
Pin etown
Pro
sp
ect
Strasburg
Lamb
s G
ap
Mille
r
Ridge
Lis
bu
rnHarmony Grove
Hawk Mountain
Cape H
orn
Lehman
1 00 2
Pennsy
HighG
rantle
y
Hug gins
Hillto
p
Barre
n
Old H
ano
ver
Pa
rad is
e
Green Valle
y
Mo
unt O
livet
B a lthaser
Union Deposit
13
th
Bon
air
Good H
opeWertz
ville
Creek
Sinsheim
Braggtown Wel
lsvi
lle
Hess
Paxton
Ha
i ne
s
Springwood
Sto
ve
rsto
wn
Colle
ge
Lickdale
Mid
way
Ba
r nsle
y
Old
Rite
22
Old 22
Mumper
Millport
Wabank
Airport
Roosevelt
Bo
ssle
r
Pen M
ar
20
19
Penn Grant
Hi gh Rock
Myers
Glen v ille
Bridge
Fro s ty H
ill
Baltim
ore
Sale
m C
hurc
h
Chapel H
ill
S wamp Fox
Porters
Capitol H
ill
Meadow Grove
Witmer
Roth
Church
Ferry
Market
Walto
nville
Mus
eum
Heid
elberg
Yellow Church
Baptist
Ba
er
Plea
sant
Salem
Greenbriar
Hartslog Valley
New Schaefferstown
State
C hestnut
Confe
de
rate
Fairview
Belm
ont
Bro
ad
Limekiln
Bowser
Rippling Run
Days Mi l l
Locust
Yo
rk
ana
Little Foutz Valley
Roundto
p
K
ee
fer
Re
yn
ol ds M
ill
Bern
vill
e
Gra
ndvi
ew
Atom
Unio
n C
hurc
h
Rock Point
Sm
alt
z
Arc
on
a
Sw
am
p
Hill
Willow
Sm
ith S
tatio
n
Sr3017
Scott
Fai rgro
unds
Poplar
Sta
mper
Car
sonia
Pig
eon
Hill
Logan
State Hill
We
stm
ins
ter
24
Ba
ck R
un
Mount P
isgah
Eastern
Railro
ad
Impo
unding Dam
T4
64
Sheridan
Pape
rmill
Mid
vale
Jack
s M
ount
ain
Hic
kory H
ill
Stumpy
Chris
tmas
Village
New
Danvill
e
Fry
svil le
Sunn
yburn
Clearview
Edgar
Richland
Brownton
Tucker ton
Ge
org
e
Harris Mill
Paper Mi ll
Reh
rers
burg
Taxville
Longmeadow
Cro
ss R
oads
Weisburg
Waln
ut
Cle
ar S
prin
g
Big
Sp
rin
g
Lebanon
K
Elizabeth
Reading
Bond
Kraft Mill
274
Te
en
Ch
alle
ng
e
Susquehanna
Seaks Ru n
Ma
rsh
Log
Ple
asant V
iew
Cam
p G
round
Mill
ers
Mill
Fa
wn G
rove
Fo
rge
Kindig
Salt
Hershey Park
La
nca
ste
r
Maple Gro
ve
1001
C
onst
itutio
n
Strausstown
Scotland
W indsor Castle
Upland
Northern
Fritzt
own
Ra
ceW
es
t
Re
illy
Maple
Gravel
Marsteller
Ann
Kent
Sunset
Bow
man
Ha
nc
ock
Showalter
Cente
rville
Pa
lmyra
Sa
nd
hill
Fissels Church
Ho
llyw
oo
d
Pre
sid
ent
Windsor
C
ham
bers
Nursery
Au
gw
ick
Rob
inw
ood
Ande
rsonto
wn
Country Club
Sho
ey
New
vill
e
John
Mount A
iry
Bermud
ian
Ch
urc
h
Riv
er
Corn
er
Washington
Louck
s
Avia
tion
Division
Wal
l
22nd
Ele
ctric
Meyers
Fa
hs
Old
Cannery
Berks
White O
ak
Hig
hla
nd
Kelke
r
Wright
Ple
asantview
Ma
nh
eim
Cool Springs
Newport
Quarry
Fid
dle
rs E
lbow
Rock
s
Brigh
ton
Te
a C
ree
k
2018
Linden
Harn
ey
Wate
r
Mccoy
Pointe
Cottage
1st
Honey
Harvest
Mo
un
t P
isc
ah
South
Fir
Sh
artle
sville
Industria
l Pa
rk
Noble
Du
nk F
ree
lan
d
Sti
tze
r
Riv
er
Hill
North
Slocum
Le
mo
n
Nev
ers
ink
Old Strasburg
Siloam
Essex
Whiskey Run
He
ide
lbe
rg
Alp
ine
Main
Susquehanna
Cre
ek
Valley
Park
Air
po
rt
Old
Pro
spec
t
Wago
6th
3rd
Mill
Fro
nt
Gle
nville
3rd
Ri ver
Mar
ket
Chestnut
Hill
Ge
org
e
Airport
Main
Myers
Sheridan
Baptist
Ma
in
Ma
in
Pin
eto
wn
Main
High
Airport
Old 22
Airport
Yo
r k
P
ark
Ma
i n
Hill
Ma
in
Mai
n
Lickdale
Main
Main
Lay
3019
Bridgeto
n
Main
Miller
Riv
er
Rehrersburg
Strasburg
Old
Felton
Marke
t
Penn
Sm
altz
Old
Yo
rk
H
ess
5th
Main
Old
Main
Church
Ch
urc
h
Old
Derry
2nd
Main
Mai
n
Siddonsburg
Park
Lewisberry
Valley
7th
Fairview
Kin
g
76°0'0"W
76°0'0"W
76°10'0"W
76°10'0"W
76°20'0"W
76°20'0"W
76°30'0"W
76°30'0"W
76°40'0"W
76°40'0"W
76°50'0"W
76°50'0"W
77°0'0"W
77°0'0"W
77°10'0"W
77°10'0"W
77°20'0"W
77°20'0"W
77°30'0"W
77°30'0"W
77°40'0"W
77°40'0"W
77°50'0"W
77°50'0"W
78°0'0"W
78°0'0"W
40°40'0"N
40°40'0"N
40°30'0"N
40°30'0"N
40°20'0"N
40°20'0"N
40°10'0"N
40°10'0"N
40°0'0"N
40°0'0"N
39°50'0"N
39°50'0"N
39°40'0"N
39°40'0"N
Percent Traveling into CLASHStudy Area Based on Zip CodesFigure 2.9: Percent Traveling into
Study Area Based on Zip Codes
02
64
6 M
T H
B 6
-7-0
7
20,000 80,0000
Feet
3 120
Miles
1 inch equals 3.5 miles /
Number of Employees Traveling
into the CLASH Study Area
60 - 1000
1001 - 3000
3001 - 5000
5001 - 10000
10001 - 20000
Study Area Boundary
Existing Conditions
Page 37
US 15 or PA
581. In both cases, their direction along US 15 and PA
581 was noted. In
addition to noting the truck travel path, general information about the truck w
as noted and approxim
ate travel times w
ere recorded.
Using a survey of this type, a large quantity of detailed inform
ation about the movem
ent of freight w
ithin the study area and their destinations outside the study area was obtained
without causing a large disruption to traffic flow
. In the end, almost 300 truck paths w
ere recorded; w
ith around 260 being deemed “usable” (the truck w
as not “lost” in the network
or the truck did not turn into a destination such as a shopping center). The excel tables containing the raw
truck data that was collected as w
ell as summ
ary tab sheets can all be found in A
ppendix D. The quantity of trucks w
hich used a specific link throughout the course of the study is show
n on Figures2.10 and 2.11.
3. Truck C
ompany Interview
s
The interview process consisted of calling several of the large trucking firm
s within the
study area and ascertaining their freight travel patterns for a typical day. The interview w
as designed to gain a better understanding of the quantity of vehicles traveling through the study area and their ultim
ate destination outside of the study area. A total of 5 trucking
firms w
ere called. Information w
as only obtained from 3 out of the 5 firm
s. The results of each survey can be found in A
ppendix E. This is only a cross-section of the businesses w
hich ship freight in the study area. The remaining large trucking firm
s, local deliveries, sm
aller businesses with loading docks, and several others also increase the am
ount of freight traveling w
ithin the study area.
FIGURE #2.10 O-D Link Volumes
Existing Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
Study Intersection Signalized
Study Intersection Unsignalized
LEGEND
ORRS
BRID
GE
RD
CARLISLE PIKE
CARLISLE PIKE
TRINDLE
RDST
JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
TRINDLE
RD
INDUSTRIA
LPARK RD
RA
ILR
OA
DA
VE
CE
NT
RA
L
BL
VD
HARRISBURG EXPRESSWAY
SP
OR
TIN
GH
ILL
RD
SH
EELY L
N
GIL
MO
RE
RD
641
11
581
MA
TC
H T
O IN
SE
T
TRINDLE
RD
CARLISLE PIKE
15
32
ND
ST
MA
TC
H T
O A
BO
VE
MATCH TO NEXT SHEET
513
21
22
21
14
11
10
11
4
1
2
1
3
24
42
32
55
6
10
13
8
3923
10
041
7260
11
0
1
24
31
57
FIGURE #2.11 O-D Link Volumes
Existing Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
SH
EELY
LN
WESLE
YD
RIV
E
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
GETTYSBURG
RO
AD
ST.JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
RA
ILR
OA
DA
VE
SLATE
HIL
LRO
AD
LO
CU
ST
ST
15
Study Intersection Signalized
Study Intersection Unsignalized
LEGEND
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
MAIN ST
MATCH TO PREVIOUS SHEET
1312
38
00
115
35
1
3
6
5
6
5
6
3
5
3
2
Existing Conditions
Page 40
E.
Capacity A
nalysis and Methodology
The intersection analysis utilized the methodology established in the 2000 H
ighway C
apacity M
anual (HC
M) that describes the operation of intersections controlled by traffic signals.
Synchro 6.0 (Build 614) softw
are was used to apply the general H
CM
methodology and to derive
the Level of Service (LOS) and intersection delay that is provided to traffic at the intersection.
As per PennD
OT Strike-O
ff Letter 470-04-02, Synchro software is recognized and supported by
the Departm
ent. The study team discussed the use of this analytical tool and agreed that the
software w
as appropriate to analyze the corridor as Synchro can effectively analyze and model
(through SimTraffic) the affects of vehicles queuing, the interaction betw
een closely spaced intersections, and traffic signals operating in coordination.
The LOS at signalized intersections is defined in term
s of delay. Delay is a m
easure of the drivers’ discom
fort and frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel tim
e. LOS criteria are
stated in terms of delay per vehicle for the peak 15-m
inute analysis period.
The LOS at signalized intersections ranges from
A to F. A
n overall intersection LOS of D
or better is generally desirable for a signalized intersection in an urban area. A
lthough LOS of D
is desirable, a LO
S of E is acceptable for areas that experience heavily congested peak periods. Intersections w
ith an overall LOS below
D indicate that during the peak 15-m
inute travel period at the intersection, the average stopped delay per vehicle w
ill exceed 55 seconds.
The 16 signalized intersections in the corridor were analyzed. T
able2.2 sum
marizes the overall
intersection results.
Existing Conditions
Page 41
Table 2.2 – E
xisting Overall Intersection L
OS and D
elay Summ
ary
2007 Existing Conditions
Intersections A
M
PM
Node
Nam
e D
elayLO
S D
elay LO
S1
Carlisle Pike &
Van Patton R
d. 19.7
B
18.5 B
2
Carlisle Pike &
PA 581 off-ram
p 36.8
D
126.6 F
3 C
arlisle Pike & Sporting H
ill Rd.
55.7 E
63.1 E
4 C
arlisle Pike & St. John's C
hurch Rd.
24.3 C
26.7
C
5 C
arlisle Pike & O
rr's Bridge R
d. 27.7
C
26.7 C
51
Carlisle Pike &
Central B
lvd. 22.8
C
38.2 D
6
Carlisle Pike &
32nd St. 52.6
D
182.7 F
7 Trindle R
d. & Sheely Lane
35.0 C
36.1
D
8 Trindle R
d. & Sporting H
ill Rd.
18.3 B
21.2
C
9 Trindle R
d. & R
ailroad Ave.
19.3 B
15.0
B
10 Trindle R
d. & St. John's C
hurch Rd.
31.3 C
34.5
C
13 Trindle R
d. & 32nd St.
198.5 F
206.9 F
14 Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
Sheely Ln./Wesley D
r.42.3
D
48.9 D
17
Simpson Ferry R
d. & St. John's C
hurch Rd.
27.9 C
30.2
C
18 G
ettysburg Rd. &
Wesley D
r. 23.6
C
26.6 C
19
Gettysburg R
d. & Locust St.
16.7 B
22.2
C
Notes:�
HC
M D
elay and Level-of-Service values are for the overall intersection, as generated by Synchro v.6, B
uild 614. �
Delay is expressed in term
s of "seconds per vehicle".
The Synchro files used to generate the LOS and capacity analysis are included on the C
D in the
Technical Files, Section 2.
F.
Local Business and E
nvironmental C
haracteristics
1. Land U
se
The existing land use information is based on the land use G
IS mapping obtained from
C
umberland C
ounty. The land use within the study area w
as verified in the field and a Land Use
map w
as prepared (Figure2.12). Land use categories that exist w
ithin the study area, and which
have been mapped include R
esidential, Com
mercial R
etail, Com
mercial Services, C
omm
ercial O
pen Space/Recreation, Industrial, Public/Sem
i-Public, Agricultural and V
acant land.
Wesley
Drive
Sheely L
ane
Simpson Ferry Road
Gett
ysburg R
oad
US 1
5
Sla
te H
ill Ro
ad
St. J
ohn's
Churc
h R
oad
Zim
merm
an D
rive
Sp
ortin
g H
ill Ro
ad
Trindle
Road (P
A 641) R
ailro
ad A
venue
PA 581
Cen
tral B
ou
levard
Orr
's B
ridge
Road
Carlisle Pike (US 11)
ope R
oad
HAMPDEN
LOWER ALLEN
CAMP HILL
MECHANICSBURG
UPPER ALLEN
SHIREMANSTOWN
EAST PENNSBORO
1
7
9
8
5
6
4
3
2
22
21
12
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
11
13
10
9
7
8
5
4
3
6
2
1
98
99
92
87
85
86
5352
51
49
45
4847
46
44
50
63
64
62
43
56
57
58
60
59
61
83
84
7475
76
91
90
89 88
82
81
79
7372
7069
68
6566
67
42
403938
4137
36
35
32
34
3331
29
30
28
2726
93
9495
97
96
25
23222120
2419
18
17
16
15
14
13
10
12
11
147
147
146
142
141
101 102
103
105
104
112
111
110
117
113
108
106
107
109
114
115
116
119
120
118
121
125
124
122
123
140
139
138137
136
135
126
131
129
134
133132
100
54
55
80
77
78
71
145
144
143
127
128
130
1 inch equals 400 feet
02
64
7 M
T H
B 1
1 2
, 2
00
6
10
:38
:53
AM
400 1,6000
Feet
Intersection Under Study
Study Area
Municipal Boundary
Existing Land Use by Parcel
Residential (single-family, townhouses, multi-family, nursing homes, mobile home parks, etc.)
Large Lot Residential (single-family on greater than 5 acres)
Commercial Retail (Business that sell goods for profit)
Commercial Services (professional and personal services / office uses)
Commercial Open Space / Recreation (campgrounds, golf courses, speedway, etc.)
Industrial (manufacturing, mining, warehousing)
Public / Semi-Public
Agrucultural
Vacant
Hydrology
Home DepotK-MartDenny'sT-MobileHoliday InnLowesDunkin DonutsFriendly'sCJ Tire & AutoOld Country BuffetBob Evan'sBurger KingGateway Square Shopping CenterHampden Township ParkSporting Hill Elementary SchoolCarpet MartWest Shore Office ParkMomentumRancho GrandeYe Olde Ale HouseCVSJiffy LubeEl RodeoRite AidHampden Centre Shopping CenterRed LobsterAdvanced Auto PartsN.B. LiebmanWest Shore ElksCar WashHampden CleanersCarlisle Pike Pre-OwnedExxonSun Motor CarsMy Place PizzaWest Shore Health ClubSt. Timothy ChurchHessCitizens BankThe Homestead GroupImpressions SalonSierra MadreGood Shepard Elementary SchoolSpring Lake ParkVA Treatment ClinicKFCT-MobileSunocoJ.C. Barr PropertiesCVSFriendly'sOrrstown BankWilliam SonomaTexacoJos A Bank / Starbucks / TalbotsGMAC MortgageCommerce BankCamp Hill MallArnold LogisticsArnold LogisticsArnold LogisticsM. Glosser & Sons Inc.YMCASalvation ArmyR.T. Grim ElectronicsArndt DentistryFamily DentistryHair TechniciansWest Shore ChamberDisabled American VeteransLegacy BankPeace ChurchSt. John's Church CemeteryStorage CenterMunicipal WasteSt. John's CenterMcDonaldsSonocoThe ColiseumWatkins Paving Inc.Rite AidPurinaArnold LogisticsPierce-PhelpsArnold LogisticsFoot LockerBP GasEmmanuel Baptist ChurchTrindle BowlCAD MastersTarantinAmes True TemperNapaA Child's EyesSalonCountry MeadowsChef WongE. Trindle Commerce CenterGulf Mechanicsburg TerminalNaval Supply DepotTreasures from the SeaMrs. Natalie's AstrologySuzukiLift Inc.Kirby's PanelingPA.netCapital Self StoragePhilly Steak & Hogie HouseSun CompanyM&T BankFranklin'sEast Gate PlazaWachoviaTurkey HillDrive KoreWeisWindsor Park Shopping CenterBethany VillageVernon Wass Township ParkBethany VillageWesley PlazaAlpha Fitness ClubExeceutive Park WestMechanicsburg DinerSelf StorageAllen Middle SchoolGeorges CleanersKeystone ServiceLower Allen Elementary SchoolPizza GrillPeter's Field ParkTrinity High SchoolBontonCapital City MallWard TruckingProgressivePA Business CenterPjax FreightSkyline SteelSlate Hill Business CenterHampden Township BuildingDairy Farmers of AmericaJames D. Bogar Law OfficesShiremanstown Fire CompanyT + K Beauty SalonFull Gospel Church of GodHampden Township Emergency Services
12345678910111213
14
15
16171819202122232425
26272829303132
33343536
37383940414243
444546474849505152535455
565758596061626364656667686970
717273
747576777879808182838485868788
89909192939495969798
99
100101102103104105106107108
109110111112113114115116117
118119
120121122123124125126127128129
130131132133134135136137138139140
141
142
143
144
145146
147
NAME#
02
64
7 M
T H
B 1
2-1
7-0
7
Existing Conditions
Page 43
Residential and industrial land uses com
prise most of the study area. The residential land use is
scattered throughout the area with m
any large neighborhoods. The industrial land use is centered around St. John’s C
hurch Road and R
ailroad Avenue. The industrial center generates a large
amount of truck traffic w
hich utilizes various routes within the study area to access m
ajor roadw
ays such as US 15 and PA
581. The Naval Supply D
epot occupies a large area in the w
estern section of the study area and is a major em
ployer. Com
mercial R
etail and Com
mercial
Services are generally located along the major corridors of the C
arlisle Pike and Trindle Road.
Overall, the study area is essentially built out w
ith little area for any large scale future developm
ent.
2.Environm
ental Features
The existing
environmental
features w
ithin the
study area
include natural,
cultural and
socioeconomic resources. N
atural resources consist of streams and w
etlands. The cultural resources are com
prised of National R
egister of Historic Places listed, eligible, and potentially
eligible historic structures and historic districts. Socioeconomic resources include potential
hazardous waste sites. The existing environm
ental features within the study area w
ere mapped in
greater detail around the intersections studied, in order to estimate the im
pacts that proposed im
provement concepts m
ay have. The overall environmental features are show
n in Figure2.13.
Natural Resources
Two stream
s are located within the study area, the C
onodoguinet Creek w
hich encroaches on the northern boundary of the study and C
edar Run w
hich is located in the southeastern portion of the study area. W
ithin the study area, the Conodoguinet C
reek is listed as a Warm
Water Fishery,
and Cedar R
un is listed as a Cold W
ater Fishery, according to the Pennsylvania Code, Title 25.
Environmental Protection, C
hapter 93. Water Q
uality Standards.
The 100-year floodplains of the streams w
ithin the study area were review
ed, using existing Federal Em
ergency Managem
ent Agency data. C
edar Run has a designated 100-year floodplain
however; the C
onodoguinet Creek floodplain does not extend beyond the creek bank w
ithin the study area.
The National W
etlands Inventory database, maintained by the U
.S. Fish & W
ildlife Service, was
reviewed to determ
ine if any wetlands existed w
ithin the study area. No w
etlands are located w
ithin the study area. C
ultural Resources
Within the study area, there are tw
o National R
egister of Historic Places listed resources and one
National R
egister eligible resource. This information w
as obtained from the Pennsylvania
Cultural
Resource
Geographic
Information
System,
which
is a
partnership betw
een the
Pennsylvania Historical &
Museum
Com
mission and PennD
OT.
The National R
egister listed resources include the Joannes Eastbounderly House w
hich is located adjacent to the C
arlisle Pike/PA 581 interchange and the Peace C
hurch which is located in the
northwest quadrant of the St. John’s C
hurch Road/Trindle R
oad intersection. The Cum
berland V
alley Railroad is the only N
ational Register eligible resource located in the study area and
Wesley
Drive
Shee
ly L
ane
Simpson Ferry Road
Gett
ysburg R
oad
US 1
5
St. J
ohn's
Churc
h R
oad
Zim
merm
an D
rive
Sp
ortin
g H
ill Ro
ad
Trindle
Road (P
A 641) R
ailro
ad A
venue
PA 581
Cen
tral B
ou
levard
Orr
's B
ridge
Road
Carlisle Pike (US 11)
Go
od
Ho
pe R
oad
Conodoguinet Cre
ek
Slate
Hill R
oad
Ceda
r R
un
Vernon WassTownship Park
Peter's Field Park
Hampden Township Park
D
R
O
C
P
G
Q
I
J
F
M
N
H
B
E
A
L
K
HAMPDEN
LOWER ALLEN
CAMP HILL
MECHANICSBURG
SHIREMANSTOWN
UPPER ALLEN
EAST PENNSBORO
EAST PENNSBORO
Hess
Exxon
BP Gas
BP Gas
Sunoco
Jiffy Lube
Sun Company
Turkey Hill
A Plus Sunoco
Keystone Service
Hampden Cleaners
George's Cleaners
Giant Gas Station
Naval Supply Depot
Utility Transformers
Clean Scene Dry Cleaners
Gulf Mechanicsburg Terminal
1
7
9
8
5
6
4
3
2
22
21
12
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
11
13
10
1 inch equals 400 feet400 1,6000
Feet
LEGEND
Potential Hazardous Waste Site
Intersection Under Study
Stream
Wetlands
Parks
Study Area
Historic Resources
Municipal Boundary
02
84
5 M
T H
B 1
2 1
7,
20
07
1
:47:5
4 P
M
HISTORIC RESOURCE
NAME
Johannes Eberly House Peace Church
Cumberland Valley Railroad
Navy Supply Depot, Mechanicsburg C. Lester & Louise Emmert House Daniel Sherban House David Merkel House Andrew Moore House Shiremanstown Borough HallShiremanstown First Church of God John Shopp House
4601 Gettysburg Pike4700 Gettysburg PikeThe Methodist Home for ChildrenResidential Development, Camp Hill at Chestnut and Market Streets intersectionResidential Development, Spanish Eclectic style block at Oak Avenue and Trindle RoadJohas Rupp HouseVillage of Shiremanstown
National Register Listed Resources
A.
B.
National Register Eligible Resources
C.
Previously Surveyed – No Determinations
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Potential Historic Resources
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
R.
#
Existing Conditions
Page 45
extends in an east-west direction betw
een Trindle Road and Sim
pson Ferry Road. The N
ational R
egister listed and eligible resources have been identified on the Environmental Features
mapping. H
istoric resources that are potentially eligible for the National R
egister (i.e. older than 50 years) have also been m
apped for the study area. These resources will need to be evaluated
further however; this inform
ation was beneficial w
hile developing the improvem
ent concepts.
Socioeconomic Resources
Socioeconomic resources w
ithin the study area consist of potential hazardous waste sites and
comm
unity facilities and emergency services.
Due to the largely developed nature of the study area, several potential hazardous w
aste sites exist. This inform
ation was obtained through field investigations. Potential sites range from
gas stations, car dealerships, dry cleaners, the N
aval Supply Depot and bulk storage facilities. The
potential sites have been identified and located on the Environmental Features m
apping.
Com
munity facilities and em
ergency services within the project area include educational
facilities and police, fire and ambulance services. V
arious elementary, m
iddle and high schools are w
ithin the project limits. V
arious fire services are within the project lim
its, including fire com
panies that serve Ham
pden Township and Shirem
anstown B
orough.
Existing Conditions
Page 46
G.
Imm
ediate Term Im
provements
After analyzing the netw
ork under existing conditions, it was determ
ined that changes could be m
ade imm
ediately to the corridor to improve existing conditions. In order to have m
inimal
impact and cost, the im
provements w
ere limited to adjusting cycle lengths, signal splits and
offsets, re-striping, and adding minim
al turn-lanes only where absolutely necessary. These
minim
al impact and cost im
provements w
ere labeled “Imm
ediate Term Im
provements.” T
able2.3 sum
marizes the im
mediate term
improvem
ents.
Table 2.3 – Sum
mary of Im
mediate T
erm Im
provements
Intersection Im
provements
Improve striping for southbound left turn lane on Sporting H
ill.C
arlisle Pike &
Sporting Hill R
oad Extend eastbound right turn lane from
Sporting Hill to 581 B
ridge.
Carlisle Pike &
St. John’s C
hurch Road
Re-delineate the center TW
LTL on the westbound approach to
extend the left turn lane to provide 290’ of storage.
Re-delineate the center TW
LTL on the eastbound approach to extend the left turn lane to provide 360
’ of storage.Im
prove delineation of westbound right turn lanes.
Carlisle Pike &
O
rr’s Bridge
Road/C
entralB
oulevard.Extend the northbound left turn lane to provide 300’ of storage and install overhead lane control signage.
32nd Street (US15)
& C
arlisle Pike -A
ND
-32nd Street (U
S15) and Trindle R
oad
Advance to Prelim
inary Engineering, the concept developed including a third southbound through lane and changes in signal cycles to restrict northbound left turns at C
arlisle Pike and southbound left turns at Trindle R
oad. This would also include the
study of eliminating the split phasing of both intersections.
Trindle Road &
St. John’s C
hurch Road
Restripe the northbound right turn lane to provide 230
’ of storage.
St. John's Church
Road and Industrial
Drive
Install traffic signal.
Travel Dem
and Model
Page 47
III.
TR
AV
EL
DE
MA
ND
MO
DE
L
A.
The Harrisburg A
rea Travel Dem
and Model
The Harrisburg A
rea Travel Dem
and Model (H
ATD
M) w
as developed by the Tri-County
Regional Planning C
omm
ission (TCR
PC) for use as a tool in transportation planning and air-
quality evaluation. TCR
PC serves as the m
etropolitan planning organization for the Harrisburg
Metropolitan area, w
hich includes Dauphin, C
umberland, and Perry C
ounties.
The HA
TDM
is a regional, trip-based demand m
odel that is implem
ented in the Citilabs C
UB
E TP Plus softw
are platform. A
four-step modeling process is used and includes trip generation,
trip distribution, mode choice, and trip assignm
ent. The model forecasts passenger car and truck
trips, as well as m
ode shares of travel (highway, transit, carpool, etc.). The m
odel region is divided into 489 traffic analysis zones (TA
Zs). Each TAZ contains current and projected data
used to predict trip generation data. The model’s roadw
ay network represents all state roadw
ays and som
e significant city and township roadw
ays.
The most current version of the H
ATD
M had been calibrated and validated according to 2002
travel data, and 2002 was considered the m
odel’s “base year”. The ultimate horizon year for the
model w
as 2030. Interim year scenarios and alternatives can be created and tested, by varying
input assumptions, then evaluated to help determ
ine a preferred transportation improvem
ent or program
and its priority. 1
B.
CLA
SH Project Travel D
emand M
odel
The TCR
PC agreed to provide runs of the H
ATD
M for use in the C
LASH
Project. Model runs
were requested on a scenario-by-scenario basis, and M
cCorm
ick and the TCR
PC collaborated to
develop the input roadway netw
orks and land use assumptions for each scenario. TC
RPC
provided M
cCorm
ick Taylor with m
odel output files, including loaded network files, turning
movem
ent files, and trip matrices.
1.Base Year M
odel
McC
ormick Taylor review
ed the HA
TDM
Base Y
ear (2002) roadway netw
ork and model
parameters. A
few revisions to the roadw
ay network w
ere made to im
prove the model’s
accuracy within the C
LASH
study area. In some cases, the dem
and modeling softw
are could not be coded to specifically reflect the operational conditions of study area intersections. These locations w
ere noted for “post-model” exam
ination, when traffic volum
e adjustments m
ight be applied to com
pensate for the model coding. M
inor revisions to the external station data files and the zonal dem
ographic and employm
ent data files were im
plemented, m
ostly to correct
1 Harrisburg A
rea Transportation Study, 2030 Regional Transportation Plan – 2007 U
pdate, p. IV-11. A
dopted on D
ecember 15, 2006; A
pproved on May 15, 2007.
Travel Dem
and Model
Page 48
apparent errors. Otherw
ise, no major revisions to the m
odel’s input files or coding scheme w
ere im
plemented.
2. M
odel Calibration and Validation
Since the revisions to the roadway netw
ork and zonal data files were deem
ed to be minor and
highly localized, it was assum
ed that the original calibration and validation of the HA
TDM
rem
ained valid. Therefore, a re-calibration and validation of the model w
as not completed as a
part of the CLA
SH Study.
3. Traffic Forecasting M
ethodology and Adjustments
The various, future conditions to be modeled w
ere grouped into “scenarios”, and each scenario consisted of a land use/grow
th component and a roadw
ay network com
ponent. The land use/grow
th component, as prepared by TC
RPC
, is forecasted to a specific “horizon” year as an estim
ation of future population and employm
ent within the TA
Zs and external growth outside of
the HA
TDM
Area. The roadw
ay network com
ponent contained assumptions about the future
condition of the roadway netw
ork. For all scenarios, even the “No-B
uild” scenarios, the roadw
ay network includes the transportation im
provement program
(TIP) projects and other “developer” projects that are scheduled for com
pletion before the specified horizon year.
The HA
TDM
produces traffic forecasts for four distinct periods during a given weekday: A
M
Peak (6:00 AM
to 9:00 AM
), Midday (9:00 A
M to 3:00 PM
), PM Peak (3:00 PM
to 6:00 PM),
and Night (6:00 PM
to 6:00 AM
). The sum of the traffic volum
es for all periods represents the daily/24-hour traffic volum
e. For the purposes of the CLA
SH Study, peak hour traffic volum
es w
ere required as input to the traffic analysis.
Initial Forecasts
Output from
the HA
TDM
provided peak period (as opposed to peak hour) turning movem
ent volum
es. The AM
Peak period was 6:00 A
M to 9:00 A
M, and the PM
Peak period was 3:00 PM
to 6:00 PM
. According to the m
odel’s documentation, 40 percent of the A
M peak period volum
e occurred in the A
M Peak hour, and 35 percent of the PM
Peak period volume occurred in the PM
peak hour. The peak period volum
es were factored to obtain the peak hour volum
es.
To account for limitations in traffic forecasting at the turning m
ovement level of detail, N
CH
RP
255 establishes forecasting procedures that minim
ize these limitations. The N
CH
RP procedures
use the relationships among base year traffic counts and the m
odel volumes (base year and future
year) to calculate volume forecasts based on the volum
e changes observed between the base year
model and the future year m
odel runs. Depending on the extent of the volum
e changes and the original count volum
es, different routines are used to calculate the initial peak hour volume
forecasts.
Travel Dem
and Model
Page 49
Missing Roadw
ays & Intersections
The CLA
SH study area contains roadw
ays and intersections that were not represented in the
travel demand m
odel. The initial peak hour volume forecasts at these locations w
ere estimated
by growing the traffic volum
e counts by a linear growth rate—
1.20 percent per year on thoroughfares and 0.20 percent per year on drivew
ays and neighborhood streets for established land uses.
Traffic Pattern Adjustments
The initial peak hour volume forecasts w
ere evaluated for consistency on both a corridor and intersection basis. The follow
ing two types of traffic pattern adjustm
ents were m
ade:
�Intersection-to-Intersection Im
balances – Volum
e imbalances betw
een the study area intersections are expected, since traffic accesses the roadw
ay network at m
any points along the netw
ork. How
ever, the travel forecasting techniques and the location of traffic loading points in the m
odel can exaggerate these imbalances, and it is necessary to
reconcile the imbalances. For the C
LASH
forecasts, these imbalances w
ere evaluated according to the follow
ing:
oLocation of Traffic Loading Points in the M
odel Netw
ork – The model loads
traffic onto the roadway netw
ork at a limited num
ber of points—typically one to
four points per traffic analysis zone (TAZ). If the TA
Zs are larger than the grain of the roadw
ay network, the volum
e forecasts at intersections near the model’s
traffic loading
points can
be overly-influenced
by the
loaded volum
es. K
nowledge of the traffic loading points and trip distribution patterns in the
CLA
SH study area helped to identify locations w
here the forecasted volumes
would be m
ost affected and in need of adjustment.
oD
ifferences observed in the 2007 traffic count volumes – Since these differences
provide an
estimate
of the
traffic entering/exiting
the roadw
ay betw
een intersections, the forecasted volum
es were adjusted to replicate the differences
observed in the traffic counts. Minim
al adjustments w
ere applied at most
intersections. How
ever, some larger adjustm
ents were m
ade along the Trindle R
oad corridor.
�Parallel R
oute Adjustm
ents – The travel demand m
odel assigns traffic to parallel routes according to sim
plified comparisons of travel tim
e and distance. Occasionally, these
estimates are over-sim
plified, since they do not reflect subtle network details, driver
perceptions, and other dynamic elem
ents of the transportation system. In these cases, the
model m
ay over-assign a certain route because of the over-simplifications, and it is
necessary to manually shift volum
es from one route to another. For the C
LASH
forecasts, the 2007 traffic count data and local know
ledge of the study area roadways
were referenced in the process of shifting volum
es among parallel corridors. Traffic on
Travel Dem
and Model
Page 50
only one set of parallel routes—PA
581, Sporting Hill R
oad, and Orr’s B
ridge Road—
was adjusted using this m
ethod.
Final Traffic Forecasts
The final AM
and PM Peak hour forecast volum
es represent the output from this Traffic V
olume
Forecasting Methodology. These volum
es can be found in their corresponding specific 2020 and 2030 sections of the report.
C.
Additional A
nalysis
1. Trindle Road Interchange Traffic Pattern Analysis
Currently, the interchange of PA
581 at Trindle Road is a partial interchange that only provides
ramps to and from
the east on PA 581. C
ompleting the interchange by adding ram
ps to and from
the west on PA
581 has been suggested as a way to reduce unnecessary traffic circulation on the
street network. To assess the traffic pattern and volum
e effects of such a project, TCR
PC
conducted a supplemental travel m
odel run for the future year, 2030, which included the
completed interchange. B
ased on the methodology described previously, M
cCorm
ick Taylor prepared future year 2030 turning m
ovement volum
e forecasts with the full interchange.
The land use/growth forecasts for 2030, as com
pleted by TCR
PC for their long-range planning
efforts, were used in the m
odel.
The roadway netw
ork for this supplemental 2030 m
odel run was identical to the 2030 “N
o-B
uild” run, except for the completed interchange. The additional interchange ram
ps—to and
from the w
est on PA 581—
were generically added to the roadw
ay network at the point w
here PA
581 crosses St. John’s Church R
oad. As such, they do not represent any specific design or ram
p locations, since the analysis w
as to evaluate only the generalized effects of the completed
interchange.
2. 15/581 Project Traffic D
iversion Analysis
As identified previously, the U
S 15/PA 581 Im
provement Project is a m
ajor interchange relocation and im
provement project that, w
hen completed, w
ill cause area-wide changes in
traffic patterns and volumes on roadw
ays in the CLA
SH Study A
rea. It was suggested by the
Study Team that the H
ATD
M be used to estim
ate some of the anticipated traffic pattern changes.
Rather creating additional m
odel runs, a rough assessment of the traffic pattern differences w
as obtained by com
paring results from the 2002 B
ase Year m
odel (prior to the improvem
ent project) w
ith those from the 2020 Future Y
ear model (after the im
provement project).
Specifically, the evaluation identified shifts in volumes am
ong the PA 581 and U
S 15 interchanges that provided access to the C
LASH
Study Area. The follow
ing interchanges were
considered:
Travel Dem
and Model
Page 51
�PA
581 & C
arlisle Pike (Gatew
ay) �
PA 581 &
Trindle Road
�U
S 15 & Sim
pson Ferry Road (2002)
�U
S 15 & Zim
merm
an Drive (2020)
�U
S 15 & Slate H
ill Road
�U
S 15 & W
esley Drive/R
ossmoyne R
oad
A series of “select link” analyses w
ere used to screen traffic accessing the study area TAZs using
certain pathways and directions of approach. To m
inimize the im
pact of the different model
years (2002 vs. 2020), the results were sum
marized as percentages, according to the total study
area TAZ traffic volum
es that accessed the study area at each interchange.
3. Traffic D
iversion – Proposed Trindle Road Interchange
In analyzing the Trindle Road Interchange, the diversion of traffic from
the existing roadway
network to the proposed full interchange w
as evaluated. The following three graphics show
the current and projected overall traffic traveling into the Trindle R
oad area, as well as the diversion
to the proposed full interchange. The traffic volumes show
n on the graphics do not represent total ram
p volumes, but rather the volum
e of traffic from eastbound PA
581 that is using each interchange to enter the 8 TA
Zs that comprise the C
LASH
Study Area.
Figure3.1 is derived from
the 2002 Base Y
ear Traffic Volum
es.
Figure3.2 is derived from
the 2020 Future Year Traffic V
olumes w
ith the completed 15-581
Interchange Project and without the com
pleted full Trindle Road Interchange. The differences in
the traffic volumes betw
een 2002 and 2020 are due mainly to the changes in the access roadw
ays to the area. In 2002, a greater percentage of traffic is using I-81 and PA
581 as compared to I-83
and US 15. In 2020 after the com
pletion of the 15-581 Interchange Project, the percentage shifts slightly and the use of I-83/U
S 15 increases.
Figure3.3 is derived from
the 2020 Future Year Traffic V
olumes and includes the com
pleted 15-581 Interchange Project and the com
pleted full Trindle Road Interchange w
ith PA 581. The
increase in total vehicles per day represents a further shift in traffic access patterns. Improved
access from PA
581 to the area increases the likelihood for traffic to use PA 581 rather than the
existing surface street network. A
lthough the completion of the interchange is likely to only
attract about 2,300 vehicles per day in 2020 from the surface street system
or about 230 in the peak hour. This w
ould have little impact to the overall surface street netw
ork but would create
some issues at the term
inals of the new interchange w
ith St. Johns Church R
oad or Trindle Road.
The large increase in traffic on the surface streets in the area of the completed Trindle R
oad Interchange w
ith PA 581 w
ould create additional problems for a system
that is near capacity. Im
provements to the local netw
ork would need to be in place prior to the com
pletion of the Trindle R
oad Interchange and would greatly increase the cost of the overall project. It w
as felt that the m
oney required for construction and implem
entation of the completed Trindle R
oad
Travel Dem
and Model
Page 52
Interchange could
be m
ore effectively
utilized in
the various
intersection and
corridor im
provements that w
ere the result of the CLA
SH study. This concept m
ay warrant future
consideration to address system continuity concerns but the benefit cost ratio does not w
arrant its com
pletion at this time.
Wesle
y Drive
Sheely L
ane
Simpson Ferry Road
Gett
ysburg
Road
US 1
5
Sla
te H
ill Road
St. J
ohn's
Churc
h R
oad
Zim
merm
an D
rive
Sp
ortin
g H
ill Ro
ad
Trindle
Road (P
A 641) R
ailro
ad
Aven
ue
PA 581
Ce
ntr
al B
ou
lev
ard
Orr
's B
ridge
Road
Carlisle Pike (US 11)
Go
od
Ho
pe
Ro
ad
HAMPDEN
LOWER ALLEN
CAMP HILL
MECHANICSBURG
UPPER ALLEN
SHIREMANSTOWN
EAST PENNSBORO
EAST PENNSBORO
1
7
9
8
5
4
3
22
12
20
19
18
17
1615
14
11
13
10
1 inch equals 800 feet
500 2,0000
Feet
Legend
Intersection Under Study Municipal Boundary
CLASH
Circulation Study
2002 Traffic Model
65% 35%
029
10
MT
HB
1 2
2, 2
00
8
10:2
5:1
7 A
M
BEFORE 15-581 Interchange Project
2002 Base Year Model
Eastbound PA-581 Traffic entering the
CLASH Traffic Study Area
Percentage of volume by interchange
Blue = Gateway
Red = Simpson Ferry/Slate Hill
Wesle
y Drive
Sheely L
ane
Simpson Ferry Road
Gett
ysburg
Road
US 1
5
Sla
te H
ill Road
St. J
ohn's
Churc
h R
oad
Zim
merm
an D
rive
Sp
ortin
g H
ill Ro
ad
Trindle
Road (P
A 641) R
ailro
ad
Aven
ue
PA 581
Ce
ntr
al B
ou
lev
ard
Orr
's B
ridge
Road
Carlisle Pike (US 11)
Go
od
Ho
pe
Ro
ad
HAMPDEN
LOWER ALLEN
CAMP HILL
MECHANICSBURG
UPPER ALLEN
SHIREMANSTOWN
EAST PENNSBORO
EAST PENNSBORO
1
7
9
8
5
4
3
22
12
20
19
18
17
1615
14
11
13
10
1 inch equals 800 feet
500 2,0000
Feet
Legend
Intersection Under Study Municipal Boundary
CLASH
Circulation Study
2020 Traffic Model
60% 40%
029
10
MT
HB
1 2
2, 2
00
8
10:2
5:1
7 A
M
AFTER 15-581 Interchange Project
2020 Future Year Model
Eastbound PA-581 Traffic entering the
CLASH Traffic Study Area
Percentage of volume by interchange
Blue = Gateway
Red = Zimmerman/Slate Hill
Wesle
y Drive
Sheely L
ane
Simpson Ferry Road
Gett
ysburg
Road
US 1
5
Sla
te H
ill Road
St. J
ohn's
Churc
h R
oad
Zim
merm
an D
rive
Sp
ortin
g H
ill Ro
ad
Trindle
Road (P
A 641) R
ailro
ad
Aven
ue
PA 581
Ce
ntr
al B
ou
lev
ard
Orr
's B
ridge
Road
Carlisle Pike (US 11)
Go
od
Ho
pe
Ro
ad
HAMPDEN
LOWER ALLEN
CAMP HILL
MECHANICSBURG
UPPER ALLEN
SHIREMANSTOWN
EAST PENNSBORO
EAST PENNSBORO
1
7
9
8
5
4
3
22
12
20
19
18
17
1615
14
11
13
10
1 inch equals 800 feet
500 2,0000
Feet
Legend
Intersection Under Study Municipal Boundary
CLASH
Circulation Study
029
10
MT
HB
1 2
2, 2
00
8
10:2
5:1
7 A
M
10% 75%
2020 Traffic Model
With Interchange
15%
AFTER 15-581 Interchange Project
with St. John’s Church Interchange
2020 Future Year Model with
Interchange
Eastbound PA-581 Traffic entering the
CLASH Traffic Study Area
Percentage of volume by interchange
Blue = Gateway
Green = St. John’s Church
Red = Zimmerman/Slate Hill
2020 Projections and Improvem
ents
Page 56
IV.
2020
PR
OJE
CT
ION
S AN
D IM
PRO
VE
ME
NT
S
A.
Netw
ork Modifications, A
ssumptions, and Traffic Projections
TCR
PC conducted a travel m
odel run for the future year, 2020, and provided McC
ormick Taylor
with the associated loaded roadw
ay networks and intersection turning m
ovement files. B
ased on the m
ethodology described previously, McC
ormick Taylor prepared the future year 2020 “N
o-B
uild” turning movem
ent volume forecasts.
The land use/growth forecasts for 2020, as com
pleted by TCR
PC for their long-range planning
efforts, were used in the m
odel.
The roadway netw
ork for 2020 assumed that the follow
ing roadway im
provement projects w
ere com
pleted:
�15/581 Interchange Project
�R
econfiguration of the existing US 15/PA
581 interchange. �
Construction of a collector-distributor system
. �
Relocation of the existing U
S 15 interchange at Gettysburg R
oad to a new urban
diamond interchange at Zim
merm
an Drive (Low
er Allen D
rive). �
Widening for new
auxiliary lanes on US 15 betw
een the Slate Hill R
oad interchange and H
arvard Avenue in B
orough of Cam
p Hill, and
�W
idening for new auxiliary lanes on PA
581 eastbound between U
S 15 and the I-83 interchange.
�“O
ff-Site” Improvem
ent Projects associated with the 15/581 Interchange Project
�A
ddition of a westbound lane on Sim
pson Ferry Road betw
een Zimm
erman D
rive (Low
er Allen D
rive) and St. John’s Church R
oad �
Updating the cross-section of Zim
merm
an Drive (Low
er Allen D
rive). �
Addition of northbound and southbound left-turn lanes on G
ettysburg Road at the
intersection of Gettysburg R
oad and Slate Hill R
oad/Locust Street. �
Reconfiguration and addition of turn lanes at the intersection of H
artzdale Drive
and Slate Hill R
oad. �
Interconnection of the traffic signals along Zimm
erman D
rive (Lower A
llen D
rive) and Gettysburg R
oad.
The Traffic Volum
e Forecasting Methodology for 2020 resulted in the 2020 N
o Build V
olumes
that are shown in Figures4.1 and 4.2.
FIGURE # 4.1 Turning Movements
2020 No-Build Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
Study Intersection Signalized
Study Intersection Unsignalized
LEGEND
ORRS
BRID
GE
RO
AD
TRINDLE
ROAD
ST
JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
TRINDLE
ROAD
INDUSTRIA
L
PARKRO
AD
RA
ILR
OA
D
AV
EN
UE
CE
NT
RA
L
BO
UL
EV
AR
DHARRISBURG
EXPRESSWAY
SP
OR
TIN
GH
ILL
RO
AD
SH
EELY
LAN
E
GIL
MO
RE
RO
AD
11
MA
TC
H T
O IN
SE
T
32
ND
ST
MATCH TO NEXT SHEET
581
CARLISLE
PIKE
159
(278)
394
(402)
96
(205)
56 (103)
556 (675)
276 (278)
(64)21
(741) 874
(187) 142
(148)190
(304)252
(87)
56
888 (1056)
160(166)
(658) 767
(510) 457
51
(38)
637
(738)
(64)137
(693)543
23 (128)
41(51)
INDUSTRIAL
PARK RD
ST
JOHN’S
CHURCH
RD
RAMP
CARLISLE
PIKE
15
MA
TC
H T
O A
BO
VE
251
(248)
1759
(1146)
67
(165)
15 (13)
118 (289)
189 (287)
(251) 318
(127) 237
(165) 116
(0)
34
(1562)
1128
(215)
215
59
(24)
1923
(1435)
194
(308)
5 (11)
86 (198)
82 (243)
(167) 210
(148) 167
(356) 262
(3)
18
(1788)
1228
(203)
178
TRINDLE
ROAD
68
(37)
1(2
)
104
(378)
4 (0)
382 (800)
32 (60)
(4) 12
(554) 732
(122) 236
(6)
1
(4)
0
(8)
2
OR
RS
BR
IDG
E
RO
AD
(208)
404
(208)
299 62 (382)
426 (804)
(277) 61
(472) 576
CARLISLE
PIKE
120
(221)
8
(9)
217
(326)
6 (7)
469 (785)
208 (182)
(12) 16
(482) 499
(331) 244
(7)3
(19)4
(13)5
59
(110)
137
(31
4)
405
(59
4)
64 (188)
520 (867)
106 (73)
121
(90)
368
(266)
291
(191)
(71) 19(533) 492(386) 404
817
(973)
453
(214)
522
(463)
366 (472)477 (911)104 (134)104(45)
(260)195
(1287) 1212(133)
119(1
78)
35
(310)
30
(325)
52
26
(18)
1(2
)39
(32)
(16)24
(1506) 1443(39)20
(80)
56
(3)
0
(120
)52
75(38)
1181 (1895)73
(129)
(418)
304
(487)
400
346 (488)
288 (592)
(370) 327
(511) 790
216
(151)
3
(0)
212
(238)
2(1)
526 (851)
149(93)
(5)12
(776) 878
(157) 199
(10) 1
3
(3)
6
(0) 1
0
333(385)
0
(1)
153(153)
2(2)
353 (648)
304 (409)
(3)0
(476) 790
(189) 265
(1)0(2)
1(2)0
(18)
2
(223)
9
(6) 180
(616) 1096
ST
JOHN’S
CHURCH
RD
CARLISLEPIKE
32
ND
ST
RE
ET
641
23(3)
431 (767)
(142) 105
(22)28
(340) 478
(11)
18
(208)
337
1 (4)
0 (2)
RAMP
(84)
50
(466)
765
33(145)
283(756)
(158)77
(500) 690
TRINDLE
ROAD
0(0
)
110
(303)
VA
NP
AT
TO
NR
D
GATEWAY
DR
AM (PM) Turning Movement Traffic Volume
FIGURE # 4.2 Turning Movements
2020 No-Build Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
SH
EELY
LA
NE
WESLE
YD
RIV
E
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
GETTYSB
UR
GR
OA
D
ST.JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
RA
ILR
OA
DA
VE
NU
E
SLATE
HIL
L
RO
AD
LO
CU
ST
STR
EET
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
MAIN STREET
MATCH TO PREVIOUS SHEET
169(55)
378(293)
156(262)
50 (106)
345 (542)
57 (87)
(115) 116
(363) 504
(191) 264
(95)124
(369)450
(123)96
128
(201)
25
(31)
135
(183)
(23)
37
(75)178
(219)109
(143) 269
(792) 665
(13) 43
249
(97)
212
(141)
58
(74)
10(3
1)
177(2
49)
210(4
42)
(51)
35
(249) 277
(175) 248
(43)
37
(201)181
(10)
30
10
(3)
4(1
1)
2
(6)
52(8
1)
287(4
87)
4(1
1)
(126) 156
(279) 397
(7)
3
(69)
40
(5)
4
(222)105
38
(17)
143
(194)
30
(15)
412 (527)
217 (529)
12 (68)
(39) 117
(388) 455
(26) 11
(360)326
(230)113
(169)108
15
404(215)
639(691)
97(82)
15
32
(29)
2(3
)
166
(126)
3 (19)
344 (638)
62 (66)
(4) 1
(420) 557
(108) 89
(1)
5
(3)
3
(19)
9
RA
ILR
OA
D
AV
EN
UE
(115)
65
(137)
121 182 (203)
337 (580)
(149) 238
(417) 582
MAIN
STREET
LO
CU
ST
ST
RE
ET
Study Intersection Signalized
Study Intersection Unsignalized
LEGEND
AM (PM) Turning Movement Traffic Volume
2020 Projections and Improvem
ents
Page 59
B.
Future N
o-Build C
apacity Analysis
2020 AM
2020 PM
Intersections
No-B
uild B
uild N
o-Build
Build
Node
Nam
e D
elay L
OS
Delay
LO
S D
elay L
OS
Delay
LO
S
1C
arlisle Pike &
Van Patton R
d. 17.7
B
13.7 B
23.0
C
15.3 B
2C
arlisle Pike &
PA 581 off-ram
p 47.0
D
37.6 D
140.3
F 45.0
D
3C
arlisle Pike &
Sporting Hill R
d. 55.1
E 37.6
D
54.0 D
41.2
D
4C
arlisle Pike &
St. John's Church R
d. 23.8
C
21.4 C
28.8
C
21.4 C
5C
arlisle Pike &
Orr's B
ridge Rd.
28.3 C
21.9
C
45.2 D
37.1
D
51C
arlisle Pike &
Central B
lvd. 23.0
C
19.7 B
46.1
D
50.7 D
6C
arlisle Pike &
32nd St. 67.7
E 120.9
F 125.0
F 120.5
F
7Trindle R
d. &
Sheely Lane 125.8
F 28.8
C
75.2 E
15.4 B
8Trindle R
d. &
Sporting Hill R
d. 20.1
C
35.4 D
30.7
C
55.7 E
9Trindle R
d. &
Railroad A
ve. 25.1
C
25.6 C
19.5
B
19.2 B
10Trindle R
d. &
St. John's Church R
d. 65.2
E 61.8
E 34.1
C
35.3 D
11Trindle R
d. &
Central B
lvd. 64.6
f 11.2
B
167.2 f
19.1 B
12C
hurch St. &C
entral Blvd.
162.4 f
30.9 C
67.1
f 16.6
B
13Trindle R
d. &
32nd St. 155.9
F 111.3
F 214.4
F 138.4
F
14Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
Sheely Ln./W
esley Dr.
68.4 E
34.6 C
61.5
E 51.7
D
15Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
R
ailroad Ave.
309.6 f
20.0 C
303.3
f 12.6
B
16Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
Locust St.
586.2 f
12.3 B
338.5
f 9.1
A
17Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
St. John's C
hurch Rd.
28.6 C
25.5
C
30.5 C
28.9
C
18G
ettysburg Rd. &
W
esley Dr.
153.3 F
19.5 B
53.4
D
14.1 B
19G
ettysburg Rd. &
Locust St.
66.1 E
46.9 D
32.6
C
29.3 C
20G
ettysburg Rd. &
St. John's C
hurch Rd.
98.6 f
15.4 B
144.0
f 14.9
B
21Industrial R
d. &
St. John's Church R
d. 308.7
f 10.6
B
273.8 f
14.4 B
22Trindle R
d. &
Gilm
ore Rd.
27.8 d
27.8 d
40.6 e
40.6 e
1). HC
M D
elay and Level-of-Service values are for the overall intersection, as generated by Synchro v.6, Build 614.
2). Delay is expressed in term
s of "seconds per vehicle".
3). U
PPERC
ASE levels of service for signalized intersections; low
ercase levels of service for unsignalized intersections.
2020 Projections and Improvem
ents
Page 60
C.
Roadw
ay Improvem
ents
The roadway im
provements w
hich correspond to the build conditions and the corresponding delay and LO
S outlined in the table above can be found on the Roadw
ay Improvem
ent Graphics
which are located in A
ppendix F. The major im
provements have been sum
marized in Figure
4.3. Environmental im
pacts, costs, and right-of-way im
pacts are summ
arized on the figures in A
ppendix F and a cost estimate tool has been included on the C
D w
ith this report. It should be noted that the figures in A
ppendix F include pedestrian and bicycle recomm
endations as well as
transit considerations of each project and should be consulted at the time of project initiation.
The cost estimate m
atrix which has been included on the C
D w
ith this report should also be review
ed and modified for unit costs and year of expenditure prior to project program
ming.
���������� � ����������
������� � ����������Location: Cumberland County, PA
Construct new westbound lane on Carlisle Pike.Intersection Modifications at Intersection #1 and #2.
Construct new westbound right turn lane at Intersection #3.
At Intersection #5, lengthen eastbound, westbound, and southbound right turn lanes.
Construct intersection widening and improvement project requiring ROW acquisition.
Improve eastbound approach at Intersection #10, install signals at Intersections #11 and #12.
Intersection Modifications including the addition of a 150’ eastbound right turn lane at Intersection #14.
Intersection Modifications including the creation of two northbound through lanes in conjunction with the developer project at Intersection #18.
Install a two-phase signal at Intersections #15 and #16.
At Intersection #6, add through and exclusive turn lanes at various locations. At Intersection #13, add through and exclusive turn lanes at various locations.
Intersection Modifications at Intersection #9.
Intersection Modifications at Intersection #17.
At Intersection #19, lengthen the westbound and northbound turn lanes.
Install a two-phase signal at Intersections #20.
Consider installing a signal.
2030 Projections and Improvem
ents
Page 62
V.
2030
PR
OJE
CT
ION
S AN
D IM
PRO
VE
ME
NT
S
A.
Netw
ork Modifications, A
ssumptions, and Traffic Projections
TCR
PC conducted a travel m
odel run for the future year, 2030, and provided McC
ormick Taylor
with the associated loaded roadw
ay networks and intersection turning m
ovement files. B
ased on the m
ethodology described previously, McC
ormick Taylor prepared the future year 2030 “N
o-B
uild” turning movem
ent volume forecasts.
The land use/growth forecasts for 2030, as com
pleted by TCR
PC for their long-range planning
efforts, were used in the m
odel.
The roadway netw
ork for 2030 assumed that the follow
ing roadway im
provement projects w
ere com
pleted in addition to the improvem
ent assumed for the 2020 netw
ork:
�W
idening of Sporting Hill R
oad to a 5-lane cross-section between C
arlisle Pike and Trindle R
oad.
�W
idening of Trindle Road to a 5-lane cross-section betw
een Sporting Hill R
oad and St. John’s C
hurch Road.
The Traffic Volum
e Forecasting Methodology for 2030 resulted in the 2030 N
o Build V
olumes
that are shown in Figures5.1 and 5.2.
FIGURE # 5.1 Turning Movements
2030 No-Build Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
Study Intersection Signalized
Study Intersection Unsignalized
LEGEND
ORRS
BRID
GE
RO
AD
TRINDLE
ROAD
ST
JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
TRINDLE
ROAD
INDUSTRIA
L
PARKRO
AD
RA
ILR
OA
D
AV
EN
UE
CE
NT
RA
L
BO
UL
EV
AR
DHARRISBURG
EXPRESSWAY
SP
OR
TIN
GH
ILL
RO
AD
SH
EELY
LAN
E
GIL
MO
RE
RO
AD
11
MA
TC
H T
O IN
SE
T
32
ND
ST
MATCH TO NEXT SHEET
581
CARLISLE
PIKE
141
(266)
280
(297)
273
(401)
71 (137)
620 (990)
357 (164)
(130)18
(996) 1217
(362)230
(223)157
(285)215
(33)
41
1048 (1291)
143 (163)
(824) 998
(661) 516
52
(39)
688
(848)
(65)139
(733)677
23 (129)
42(52)
INDUSTRIAL
PARK RD
ST
JOHN’S
CHURCH
RD
RAMP
CARLISLE
PIKE
15
MA
TC
H T
O A
BO
VE
257
(250)
1764
(1166)
113
(197)
16 (13)
116 (292)
218 (349)
(275) 353
(111) 313
(188) 125
(0)
40
(1613)
1248
(229)
214
60
(24)
2067
(1420)
153
(279)
5 (12)
87 (201)
83 (246)
(236) 170
(150) 169
(334) 319
(3)
18
(1830)
1289
(290)
265
TRINDLE
ROAD
119
(101)
1(2
)
114
(320)
4 (0)
368 (830)
57 (60)
(4) 13
(575) 763
(100) 231
(6)
1
(4)
0
(8)
2
OR
RS
BR
IDG
E
RO
AD
(211)
412
(218)
313 117 (465)
367 (693)
(293) 50
(468) 595
CARLISLE
PIKE
134
(235)
8
(9)
217
(274)
6 (7)
411 (676)
220 (187)
(13) 16
(481) 506
(196) 179
(7)3
(19)4
(14)5
58
(100)
175
(48
7)
602
(70
9)
82 (78)
497 (808)
112 (81)
120
(109)
513
(405)
293
(200)
(86) 20(540) 479(550) 603
885
(1068)
460
(217)
482
(532)
441 (538)608 (998)105 (136)74(55)
(422)255
(1232) 1261(135)
121(1
81)
36
(314)
30
(330)
53
26
(18)
1(2
)40
(33)
(16)24
(1607) 1544(40)20
(81)
57
(3)
0
(122
)53
76(39)
1379 (1958)74
(130)
(692)
554
(552)
483
563 (761)
447 (673)
(372) 390
(615) 899
267
(344)
3
(0)
222
(117)
2
(1)
705 (1313)
223(95)
(5)13
(1153) 1266
(207)180
(11) 1
4
(3)
6
(0) 1
1
372(415)
0
(1)
100(159)
2(2)
578 (789)
324 (431)
(3)0
(553) 902
(201) 337
(1)0(2)
1(2)0
(18)
2
(226)
9
(6) 183
(681) 1264
ST
JOHN’S
CHURCH
RD
CARLISLEPIKE
32
ND
ST
RE
ET
641
23(3)
688 (853)
(138)84
(22)28
(346) 498
(12)
18
(186)
337
1 (4)
0 (2)
RAMP
(71)
64
(463)
771
53(144)
420(991)
(167) 126
(657) 872
TRINDLE
ROAD
0(0
)
179
(311)
VA
NP
AT
TO
NR
D
GATEWAY
DR
AM (PM) Turning Movement Traffic Volume
FIGURE # 5.2 Turning Movements
2030 No-Build Conditions
Location: Cumberland County, PA
SH
EELY
LA
NE
WESLE
YD
RIV
E
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
GETTYSB
UR
GR
OA
D
ST.JO
HN’S
CHURCH
RO
AD
RA
ILR
OA
DA
VE
NU
E
SLATE
HIL
L
RO
AD
LO
CU
ST
STR
EET
SIMPSON FERRY ROAD
MAIN STREET
MATCH TO PREVIOUS SHEET
167(43)
438(368)
166(302)
39 (16)
345 (509)
78 (123)
(167) 161
(410) 489
(135) 188
(72)173
(400)484
(158)109
121
(194)
52
(128)
141
(195)
(26)
35
(162)249
(188)130
(110) 190
(783) 670
(23) 49
272
(104)
230
(224)
105
(8)
42(2
5)
142(3
38)
152(3
33)
(51)
50
(314) 399
(88)
73
(85)
65
(188)236
(34)
49
11
(3)
4(1
2)
2
(6)
79(1
55)
251(4
43)
4
(12)
(124) 124
(330) 606
(7)
3
(157)87
(5)
4
(164)92
38
(26)
166
(195)
33
(38)
540 (618)
244 (533)
64 (75)
(47) 60
(362) 446
(29) 52
(472)478
(245)
70
(79)191
15
381(205)
696(766)
88(146)
15
39
(36)
2(3
)
155
(235)
3 (19)
408 (540)
68 (94)
(4) 1
(397) 515
(149) 173
(1)
5
(3)
3
(19)
9
RA
ILR
OA
D
AV
EN
UE
(135)
111
(209)
100 184 (259)
388 (535)
(165) 294
(415) 578
MAIN
STREET
LO
CU
ST
ST
RE
ET
Study Intersection Signalized
Study Intersection Unsignalized
LEGEND
AM (PM) Turning Movement Traffic Volume
2030 Projections and Improvem
ents
Page 65
B.
Future N
o-Build C
apacity Analysis 2030 A
M
2030 PM
Intersections N
o-Build
Build
No-B
uild B
uild N
ode N
ame
Delay
LO
S D
elay L
OS
Delay
LO
S D
elay L
OS
1C
arlisle Pike &
Van Patton R
d. 17.3
B
15.1 B
29.6
C
16.8 B
2C
arlisle Pike &
PA 581 off-ram
p 55.4
E 39.4
D
197.0 F
71.1 E
3C
arlisle Pike &
Sporting Hill R
d. 94.9
F 63.3
E 90.4
F 54.6
D
4C
arlisle Pike &
St. John's Church R
d. 23.6
C
27.1 C
24.9
C
33.6 C
5C
arlisle Pike &
Orr's B
ridge Rd.
29.1 C
24.6
C
40.1 D
48.0
D
51C
arlisle Pike &
Central B
lvd. 34.8
C
19.6 B
38.4
D
59.9 E
6C
arlisle Pike &
32nd St. 212.4
F 160.2
F 215.8
F 143.7
F
7Trindle R
d. &
Sheely Lane 140.7
F 29.0
C
98.9 F
22.4 C
8Trindle R
d. &
Sporting Hill R
d. 23.2
C
46.4 D
32.8
C
33.1 C
9Trindle R
d. &
Railroad A
ve. 25.2
C
22.4 C
14.6
B
15.1 B
10Trindle R
d. &
St. John's Church R
d. 119.2
F 116.8
F 40.3
D
35.8 D
11Trindle R
d. &
Central B
lvd. 122.0
f 15.8
B
346.4 f
23.3 C
12C
hurch St. &C
entral Blvd.
172.5 f
37.2 D
58.0
f 14.2
B
13Trindle R
d. &
32nd St. 162.2
F 164.5
F 223.1
F 154.2
F
14Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
Sheely Ln./W
esley Dr.
70.9 E
45.3 D
79.2
E 61.1
E
15Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
R
ailroad Ave.
ERR
f
14.7 B
523.9
f 17.0
B
16Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
Locust St.
716.5 f
18.5 B
906.9
f 15.3
B
17Sim
pson Ferry Rd. &
St. John's C
hurch Rd.
48.7 D
45.4
D
41.9 D
46.6
D
18G
ettysburg Rd. &
W
esley Dr.
2000.4 F
20.3 C
1353.9
F 26.0
C
19G
ettysburg Rd. &
Locust St.
117.1 F
51.4 D
26.3
C
28.2 C
20G
ettysburg Rd. &
St. John's C
hurch Rd.
611.1 f
35.8 D
666.5
f 22.0
C
21Industrial R
d. &
St. John's Church R
d. 926.5
f 12.0
B
400.1 f
17.1 B
22Trindle R
d. &
Gilm
ore Rd.
56.8 f
10.2 B
79.7
f 19.6
B
1). HC
M D
elay and Level-of-Service values are for the overall intersection, as generated by Synchro v.6, Build 614.
2). Delay is expressed in term
s of "seconds per vehicle".
3). U
PPERC
ASE levels of service for signalized intersections; low
ercase levels of service for unsignalized intersections.
2030 Projections and Improvem
ents
Page 66
C.
Roadw
ay Improvem
ents
The roadway im
provements w
hich correspond to the build conditions and the corresponding delay and LO
S outlined in the table above can be found on the Roadw
ay Improvem
ent Graphics
which are located in A
ppendix F. The major im
provements have been sum
marized on Figure
5.3. Environmental im
pacts, costs, and right-of-way im
pacts are summ
arized on the figures in A
ppendix F and a cost estimate tool has been included on the C
D w
ith this report. It should be noted that the figures in A
ppendix F include pedestrian and bicycle recomm
endations as well as
transit considerations of each project and should be consulted at the time of project initiation.
The cost estimate m
atrix which has been included on the C
D w
ith this report should also be review
ed and modified for unit costs and year of expenditure prior to project program
ming.
����������� ������������
������� ������������Location: Cumberland County, PA
At Intersection #2, construct 2 southbound right turn lanes and widen westbound Carlisle Pike.
Sporting Hill Road and Trindle Road widening projects are currently on the Long Range Transportation Plan.
Developer improvements at Intersection #8 are assumed sometime between 2020 and 2030.
Major realignment of Orr’s Bridge Road to intersect Carlisle Pike at 38th Street.
At Intersection #15, add an eastbound left turn lane.
Install a three-phase signal and an eastbound left turn lane.
Public Awareness
Page 68
VI.
P
UB
LIC
AW
AR
EN
ESS
On January 23, 2008, approxim
ately forty-six mem
bers of the public attended the public meeting
for the CLA
SH C
irculation Study held at the Ham
pden Township Em
ergency Service Building,
295 S. Sporting Hill R
oad. Prior to the public meeting, ten public officials participated in a
public officials briefing.
The meeting w
as held to introduce the project to the public, display traffic and environmental
information gathered in reference to the study area and present the various concepts developed
for twenty-tw
o (22) intersections and the potential completion of the PA
581/St. John’s Church
Road Interchange.
Study area maps and surveys w
ere distributed to the meeting attendees. Tw
enty-seven of the forty-six attendees com
pleted the survey. The survey results are below. In addition to the survey
responses, several roadway and intersection configurations w
ere brought up at the public m
eeting. These are included in the Technical Files, Section 3.
Survey Responses
1. W
here do you live? (Please check)
1B
orough of Cam
p Hill B
orough 2
Lower A
llen Township
0 Shirem
anstown B
orough 19
Ham
pden Township
1East Pennsboro Tow
nship 1
Mechanicsburg B
orough 0
Upper A
llen Township
3 O
ther municipality
(Fairview, Silver Springs, C
arroll Township)
2. H
ow often do you drive through the C
LA
SH study area?
22 O
ften (at least one time per day)
4 O
ccasionally (at least once per week)
1 R
arely (less than once per week)
0 N
ever
3. Please indicate routine problem
s you encounter in the study area (check all that apply).
26 T
raffic congestion (back-ups)
19 D
elays at traffic signals
8 D
ifficulty pulling out onto roadway (from
stop sign)
13 D
ifficulty making left turns
Public Awareness
Page 69
4.Please circle the top 5 intersections/interchange you feel should receive priority attention for im
provements. (see attached m
ap for numbered intersection locations)
The highest priority intersection was noted as C
arlisle Pike, Orr’s B
ridge Road and C
entral Boulevard
with 12 indications on the survey, C
arlisle Pike and St. John’s Church R
oad was next w
ith 11 and Trindle R
oad and Central B
oulevard received 10 indications. The intersection of Carlisle Pike, M
arket Street and 32
nd Street received 9 indications as did the intersection of Carlisle Pike and St. John’s
Church R
oad. Several of the other intersections received 7 or less indications on the survey.
Several specific comm
ents and some suggestions w
ere also indicated on the survey responses. Those can be found in the Technical Files for this report.
TIP Packages
Page 70
VII.
TIP
PA
CK
AG
ES
Information from
various sources was considered w
hen developing the TIP Packages. This inform
ation included the Im
provement G
raphics and the Cost Estim
ates. An
example of a typical Im
provement G
raphic can be found in Figure
7.1.
The im
provement
graphics contain
information
relating to
the various
planned and
recomm
ended improvem
ents that should be considered in the im
mediate, short, and long term
conditions. Imm
ediate im
provements are those that should be im
plemented in the
current year, short term im
provements are those that should
be implem
ented for 2020, and long term im
provements
should be implem
ented for 2030. In addition to the im
provement listing and the graphic w
hich details the specific im
provements, a table com
paring the No-B
uild and
Build
Levels-of-Service exists
as w
ell as
documentation of any environm
ental or right-of-way issues
and concerns.
In addition to the Improvem
ent Graphics, cost estim
ates were developed for both the 2020 and
2030 improvem
ents. The cost estimates took into account the required pavem
ent, guiderail, drainage, E&
S, signage, pavement m
arkings, signals, and M
PT. A typical cost estim
ate for 2020 and 2030 can be found in Figure
7.2.
Two com
parison tables were also developed in order to
assist in the determination of the specific im
provements as
well as the order in w
hich these improvem
ents should be im
plemented. These tables are an Intersection LO
S table, a C
ost Estimate C
omparison table, and also a relative
Cost-B
enefit table. The B/C
table was used to help
develop the TIP packages discussed below.
For inclusion on the TIP, several packages and groups of packages are recom
mended for consideration based on a
combination of factors including their overall benefit-to-
cost ratio, accomm
odation of both public and private business concerns, the safety enhancem
ent to the area, and traffic flow
throughout the entire study area as an entire netw
ork.
The following four im
provement packages are recom
mended for advancem
ent to the TIP for im
mediate im
plementation and further study.
Figure7.1 –
Improvem
ent Graphic
Figure 7.2 – Typical Cost Estim
ate
TIP Packages
Page 71
1. Implem
ent the imm
ediate recomm
endations for Intersections 3, 4, and 5. These are the intersections of Sporting H
ill Road, St. John’s C
hurch Road, and O
rr’s Bridge R
oad/Central
Boulevard w
ith the Carlisle Pike. The specific im
provements to each intersection can be found
on the Improvem
ent Graphics in A
ppendix F. These improvem
ents include re-striping and re-delineating the lane configurations in the existing pavem
ent cross-section as well as som
e signal updates. Since these im
provements are adding additional travel lanes and turning lanes w
ithout constructing a new
pavement cross-section, the cost is m
inimal in com
parison to a full intersection re-construction.
2. Install a three-phase signal at Intersection 21, St. John’s Church R
oad and Industrial Drive.
Much interest by both the local com
muters and the businesses in the industrial area has been
expressed concerning the signalization of this intersection. By com
bining township and
developer funding, this improvem
ent could be initiated imm
ediately.
3. Restripe the northbound right turn lane to provide 230’ of storage at Intersection 10, Trindle
Road and St. John’s C
hurch Road. The cost is m
inimal, and the existing cross-section w
ill support the additional turn lane length.
4. Advance a detailed study of Intersections 6 and 13. These intersections are C
arlisle Pike, M
arket Street and 32nd Street and Trindle R
oad, Chestnut Street and 32
nd Street. Some item
s to consider in this study w
ould be signal phasing, pedestrian accomm
odations and their influence on the signal operations and the possibility of adding an additional north/south through lane. In addition, the concepts from
the Public Meeting should be considered. These can be found in
Technical Files section on the CD
.
In addition to the TIP Packages suggested above, the 2020 and 2030 recomm
endations from the
Improvem
ents G
raphics should
be considered
for inclusion
on the
next Long
Range
Transportation Plan update. All of these im
provement graphics can be found in A
ppendix F. They have also been sum
marized on Figure 7.3 (Im
mediate) as w
ell as Figure 4.3 (2020 im
provements) and Figure 5.3 (2030 im
provements).
#3. Improve striping for southbound left turn lane on Sporting Hill at intersection with Carlisle Pike. Extend eastbound right turn lane from Sporting Hill to 581 bridge.
#4. At Carlisle Pike and St. John’s Church Road, re-delineate the center TWLTL on the westbound approach to extend the left turn lane to provide 290’ of storage.- Investigate extending the eastbound right turn lane to provide 295’ of storage.
#5. At Carlisle Pike and Orr’s Bridge Road, re-delineate the center TWLTL on the eastbound approach to extend the left turn lane to provide 360’ of storage. Improve delineation of westbound right turn lanes. Extend the northbound left turn lane to provide 300’ of storage and install overhead lane control signage.
Total Project Cost = $550,000
- Consider re-striping Carlisle Pike from Central Boulevard to 581 bridge to accommodate dual left turns from Central Boulevard onto Carlisle Pike and carry two through lanes westbound on Carlisle Pike.
#21. Install traffic signal Industrial Drive and St. John’s Church Road.
Total Project Cost = $300,000
#6 & #13. Advance to Preliminary Engineering, the concept developed including a third southbound through lane and changes in signal cycles to restrict northbound left turns at Carlisle Pike and southbound left turns at Trindle Road. This would also include the study of eliminating the split phasing ofboth intersections.Include two additional concepts from the public in the Preliminary Engineering phase of study.
Total Project Cost = $2,000,000
����������� ���� !"���#!$���������
������� ���� !"���#�����������Location: Cumberland County, PA
#10. At Trindle and St. John’s Church Road, restripe the northbound right turn lane to provide 230’ of storage.
Total Project Cost = $20,000
1
CL
ASH
Circulation Study
Kick-O
ff Meeting
Date:
A
pril 16, 2007 T
ime:
1:00 PML
ocation: H
ampden Tow
nship Building
AT
TE
ND
EE
S R
EPR
ESE
NT
ING
PH
ON
E
E
MA
IL
Terry Adam
s
PennDO
T District 8-0
717-787-7144 teadam
Kirk Stoner
C
umberland C
ounty 717-240-5381
John Eby
Lower A
llen Township 717-975-7575
john_eby@low
er-allenpa.usC
hip Millard
TC
RPC
/HA
TS 717-234-2638
cmillard@
tcrpc-pa.orgM
ichael Gossert
Ham
pden Township
717-761-0119 m
gossert@ham
pdentownship.us
Jerry Spease
Ham
pden Township
717-761-0119 jspease@
hampdentow
nship.usJohn B
radley
Ham
pden Township
717-761-0119 jebradjr@
comcast.net
Robert G
ill
East Pennsboro Township 717-732-0711
admin@
eastpennsboro.netJim
Willshier
H
RC
/CR
EDC
717-213-5081 jw
Brian St. John
M
cCorm
ick Taylor 717-540-6040
bstjohn@m
tmail.biz
Melody C
aron
McC
ormick Taylor
717-540-6040 m
acaron@m
tmail.biz
Laura Montgom
ery M
cCorm
ick Taylor 717-540-6040
lamontgom
ery@m
tmail.biz
AT
TA
CH
ME
NT
SA
ttachment A
– Agenda
Attachm
ent B – O
D survey
Attachm
ent C – R
evised Schedule
ME
ET
ING
DISC
USSIO
N
The meeting w
as held as a kick-off meeting to the C
LASH
Circulation Study.
1.The m
eeting began with brief introductions.
2.The
meeting
attendees w
ere considered
project stakeholders.
Several potential
stakeholder originally identified did not attend the m
eeting. The general consensus was to include all original
stakeholders on project correspondence and meeting m
inutes whether or not they attended the
meeting. The only other group identified as a potential stakeholder w
as the Pennsylvania Motor
Trucking Association (PM
TA). It w
as decided that special meetings w
ould occur with PM
TA but
they did not need to be considered a project stakeholder and attend status meetings.
3.B
rian St. John requested the attendees to share their concerns with transportation issues w
ithin the study area and w
hat they hoped to see as an outcome of the C
LASH
Study. �
Terry Adam
s was concerned that stakeholders felt that a com
plete interchange at PA
581/Trindle Road w
ould reduce traffic on the Carlisle Pike, w
hich he did not believe would be
the case. He also noted funding w
ill be an issue for any potential project or package of projects w
hich result from the study.
2
�K
irk Stoner would like to see the problem
s quantified and solutions offered. �
John Eby indicated he was a proponent of the full interchange at PA
581/Trindle Road but w
as also concerned w
ith the Wesley D
rive/ Lisburn Road area and the developm
ent that is occurring and projected to occur. H
e was concerned w
ith “dump off” traffic cutting through the tow
nship to avoid PA
581. �
Chip M
illard was concerned about the lack of a good north/south corridor and suburban traffic
moving to other suburban areas. H
e also noted concerns with the am
ount of truck traffic Shirem
anstown is experiencing. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities are also a concern w
ithin the study area, especially around Sporting H
ill Road and St. John’s C
hurch Road.
�M
ike Gossert w
anted the study to determine if the PA
581/Trindle Road interchange should stay
on the TIP, as well as, to address truck traffic traveling to and from
the industrial parks along St. John’s C
hurch Road.
�R
ob Gill indicated that East Pennsboro has a vested interest in the project and hopes to see an
improvem
ent in the level of service of the various intersections. �
John Bradley noted his concern w
ith truck traffic traveling from C
arlisle to the industrial parks along St. John’s C
hurch Road. H
e would also like the project team
to study whether the signal
timing could be optim
ized on the Carlisle Pike, if a Sporting H
ill Road connection to Sim
pson Ferry R
oad would be helpful, a potential bike path along PA
581, and a possible extension of the service road behind the C
arlisle Pike to St. John’s Church R
oad.4.
Brian St. John indicated that in addition to the interchange at PA
581/Trindle Road the study team
w
ill also be studying each corridor to develop corridor specific recomm
endations and packages of solutions.
5.C
hip Millard stated that coordination betw
een the municipalities w
ould be essential. 6.
Terry Adam
s noted there will likely be benefits experienced once the PA
15/PA 581 Interchange
Project is complete.
7.B
rian St. John stated a simple, cost effective w
ay to improve traffic flow
is to coordinate the signal tim
ing along the corridors. This will be evaluated as a short-term
improvem
ent scenario as part of the study.
8.B
rian St. John reviewed som
e of the major truck generators located along St. John’s C
hurch Road
and Railroad A
venue. Brian indicated the study team
will contact PM
TA, Jim
Runk, to discuss
dispatch information to determ
ine where a m
ajority of the trucks are traveling to and from. The
team w
ould like to send letters to the larger trucking companies so they are aw
are they will be
contacted for an interview and the purpose of the C
LASH
study. The group felt a letter sent from
TRC
PC w
ould be appropriate. Chip M
illard also noted the Goods M
ovement Study that w
as com
pleted may have pertinent inform
ation on employers and trucking. The team
will contact C
hip to obtain available inform
ation and coordinate drafting a letter to the trucking companies.
9.In order to get an understanding of m
ajor employers in the area and w
here residents are traveling to, the team
will attem
pt to obtain zip code information from
the major em
ployers to incorporate into G
IS mapping. It w
as suggested that the West Shore Tax B
ureau be contacted for zip code inform
ation as they have current information from
wage taxes. The team
will obtain contact
information from
Mike G
ossert. 10.M
elody Caron gave a briefing on the traffic counts. The counts w
ill begin the week of A
pril 23rd
between peak hours, 7-8 am
and 4-5 pm. Tw
enty one intersections will be counted. John B
radley questioned w
hether the south gate of the Navy D
epot will be counted. M
elody indicated that it was
not part of the initial 21 intersections, however, it could be accom
modated. The team
will contact
the Com
manding O
fficer of Naval Support to determ
ine when the gates are open and therefore
when the counts should occur.
3
11.The origin and destination study will be conducted after the traffic counts are com
plete at the intersections of St. John’s C
hurch Road w
ith Trindle Road and Sim
pson Ferry Road. A
draft survey w
as distributed to the stakeholders for comm
ent. (Attachm
ent B)
12.Brian anticipated status m
eetings to be held in June, August, O
ctober and January with a public
meeting in N
ovember. It w
as determined afternoon m
eetings would w
ork best for the stakeholders. The status m
eeting dates decided on were June 18
th, August 20
th and October 15
that 1:00pm at the
Ham
pden Township B
uilding.. 13.The proposed project schedule w
as presented and agreed upon. It is anticipated the study will be
complete in M
arch 2008. (Attachm
ent C)
Follow up Item
s
Action :
To be com
pleted by: 1. C
ontact Jim R
unk of PMTA
M
cCorm
ick Taylor 2. C
oordinate with TC
RPC
on pertinent results of G
oods Movem
ent Study M
cCorm
ick Taylor
3. Draft letter and coordinate w
ith TCR
PC to send
letters to major area trucking com
panies M
cCorm
ick Taylor
4. Contact the W
est Shore Tax Bureau for
employee zip code inform
ation M
cCorm
ick Taylor
5. Contact N
avy Depot to determ
ine when the
South Gate is open.
McC
ormick Taylor-C
omplete
Prepared by:
McC
OR
MIC
K TA
YLO
R, IN
C.
Laura Montgom
ery
1
CL
ASH
Circulation Study
Kick-O
ff Meeting
Date:
June 18, 2007
Tim
e: 1:00 PM
L
ocation: H
ampden T
ownship B
uilding
AT
TE
ND
EE
S R
EP
RE
SEN
TIN
G
PH
ON
E
E
MA
IL
T
erry Adam
s
PennDO
T D
istrict 8-0 717-787-7144
teadams@
state.pa.us
Kirk S
toner
Cum
berland County
717-240-5381 kstoner@
ccpa.net
Dan F
lint
Low
er Allen T
ownship
717-975-7575 daniel_flint@
lower-allen.pa.us
Chip M
illard
TC
RP
C/H
AT
S
717-234-2638 cm
M
ichael Gossert
Ham
pden Tow
nship 717-761-0119
mgossert@
hampdentow
nship.us Jim
Willshier
H
RC
/CR
ED
C
717-213-5081
jwillshier@
hbgrc.org
B
rian St. John
M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 bstjohn@
mtm
ail.biz
M
elody Caron
M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 m
acaron@m
tmail.biz
B
randon Stodart
McC
ormick T
aylor 717-540-6040
bpstodart@m
tmail.biz
ME
ET
ING
DISC
USSIO
N
The m
eeting was held as a status m
eeting on the progress of work for the C
LA
SH C
irculation Study. 1.
The m
eeting began with brief introductions and the distribution of handouts.
2. B
rian St. John explained that the purpose of the meeting w
as to share the results of the data collection efforts and to discuss how
that data will be applied in the next steps of the project.
3. T
urning movem
ent traffic volume counts for the 22 study intersections w
ere collected during the study peak hour of 7:00-8:00am
and 4:00-5:00pm. M
elody Caron pointed out that the total volum
es and the truck volum
es collected during these time periods w
ere shown in Figures 1-4 of the
handouts. These traffic volum
es were utilized to com
plete an intersection capacity analysis to determ
ine intersection Level of Service (L
OS). T
he intersection capacity analysis was perform
ed utilizing the H
ighway C
apacity Manual (H
CM
) results from Synchro softw
are. Figures 5-8 of the handouts sum
marized the overall signalized intersection L
OS and the low
est approach LO
S for unsignalized
intersections.
Melody
noted that
the existing
LO
S results
reflected the
traffic conditions observed in the field; indicating the Synchro netw
ork reflects the field conditions. 4.
Brian explained that an O
rigin–Destination (O
-D) study w
as proposed to be completed w
ithin the C
LA
SH study area to better understand the num
ber of potential trips that would be attracted to a
complete interchange at T
rindle Road and PA
581. Originally, the O
-D study w
as to be an interview
survey conducted at a two signalized intersections. In planning the O
-D study, several
concerns arose including: the quality of data obtained, limited area to stop vehicles, safety of
surveyors and motorists, m
inimum
survey capture rate, and minim
um survey capture rate for truck
traffic.
2
5. B
rian explained that in working w
ith the West Shore T
ax Bureau, zip code inform
ation was
obtained that linked local residents to their employers and local em
ployees to their place of residence. T
his data was im
ported into GIS to determ
ine how com
muters, nam
ely automobile
traffic, accessed the study area. With this additional inform
ation now m
ade readily available, M
cCorm
ick Taylor proposed a new
approach to completing the O
-D study. T
he approach was
outlined in a mem
o dated May 18, 2007 and w
as distributed to the project stakeholders via email on
May 23, 2007.
6. A
s sufficient information w
as now know
n for the automobile travel patterns (significantly m
ore inform
ation than could have been obtained in the original interview O
-D study proposed) the
revised approach for the O-D
focused on truck travel patterns. In order to collect this data, a vehicle follow
ing method w
as proposed where data collectors follow
ed trucks entering and exiting the study area from
pre-determined locations.
7. B
randon Stodart discussed the results from the O
-D study. D
uring the 10 hour study period, over 300 trucks w
ere followed and their travel paths w
ere noted; of those trucks, over 250 surveys were
deemed usable. B
randon noted that based on field observations, trucks were m
ost prevalent in the northern section of the project (i.e. north of Sim
pson Ferry Road). B
randon explained the next step w
ould be to further refine the study data to determine the type and frequency of use of truck paths.
Brian noted that the truck O
-D data w
ill be utilized to further refine the regional traffic demand
model.
8. A
s discussed
in relation
to the
O-D
study,
the W
est Shore
Tax
Bureau
provided zip
code inform
ation that linked local residents to their employers and local em
ployees to their place of residence. B
rian explained that the local employees to their place of residence data w
as used to determ
ine where people w
ere traveling from to enter the study area. O
nce the location of where
local employees lived w
as plotted, general travel paths along major arterials w
ere established. Brian
noted that approximately 60%
of the trips traveling to employers w
ithin the study area could be considered a trip from
the local area; 42.4% w
est shore areas and 18.3% east shore areas. M
ike G
ossert requested that the zip codes for the areas that were considered the “local area” be provided;
Action Item
. The study team
discussed the need to show the reverse travel pattern data (i.e. local
residents traveling to their employers). T
he general consensus of the group was the public m
ay request this inform
ation, therefore these travel patterns will also be sum
marized; A
ction Item. C
hip M
illard noted the map legend on the m
ap should be modified to describe the grey shading; A
ction Item
. The study team
requested the zip code maps to be attached to the m
eeting minute distribution
email, A
ction Item. B
rian concluded the travel pattern discussion by adding that this data will be
coupled with the regional traffic dem
and model to verify O
-D patterns and to further refine T
raffic A
nalysis Zones (T
AZ
). 9.
Melody
noted that
the existing
roadway
conditions for
the intersections
and corridors
were
documented through field sketches and photographs. Figures w
ere also generated to depict the bus route and sidew
alk locations within the study area.
10. General land use of the area w
as also documented. B
rian pointed out that understanding the existing land use w
ill assist in determining the future im
provements.
11. Brian explained that R
ob Watts from
McC
ormick T
aylor has been working w
ith Al Sundara from
T
ri-County R
egional Planning Com
mission (T
CR
PC) to further refine the regional traffic m
odel to better represent the study area. A
sub area of the regional model w
as extracted and additional detail w
as included. Based on roadw
ays within the study area and land use inform
ation, additional TA
Zs
were added to enhance the centroid connectors. O
riginally the sub area was general and included
only 37 TA
Zs, now
the sub area includes 205 TA
Zs.
3
12. The next steps of the project include developing future traffic volum
es for the future conditions. T
erry Adam
s questioned the basis of growth for the external stations. B
rian explained that the grow
th would be based on T
CR
PC dem
and model, w
hich in turn is based on historic data collected. B
rian stated that he would verify this for accuracy; A
ction Item.
13. Brian noted that the study years for the project w
ould include a base year, short-term year, m
id-term
year, and long-term year. T
he exact years for these scenarios are being coordinated with T
CR
PC
and w
ill be verified with the project stakeholders.
14. Once future traffic volum
es are established, preliminary concepts w
ill be developed for both short-term
and long term im
provements. T
he last figure in the handouts provided an example of how
the intersection im
provements w
ould be summ
arized. Brian noted that the prelim
inary concepts developed w
ould provide all of the information that w
ould be needed for the forms to include the
projects on the TIP.
15. Dan Flint questioned if it w
ould be beneficial to note the original deficiency and the benefit that the im
provements are providing on the figure. T
he study team discussed and agreed if there w
as enough room
to include the information on the figure otherw
ise a separate summ
ary would suffice.
16. Brian concluded the m
eeting by summ
arizing the decision and noted the next status meeting w
ould be M
onday August 20
th, 2007 at 1:00pm.
Follow
up Items
Action :
To be com
pleted by: 1.Provide
Zip
Codes
for the
area that
was
considered local M
cCorm
ick T
aylor –
Com
pleted
(included in
meeting m
inute distribution email)
2. Map local residence traveling to their em
ployers M
cCorm
ick Taylor
3. Modify m
ap legend for zip codes M
cCorm
ick Taylor
4. Attach zip code m
aps to meeting m
inute distribution em
ail M
cCorm
ick T
aylor –
Com
pleted
(attached in
meeting m
inute distribution email)
5. Verify external station grow
th for travel demand
model
McC
ormick
Taylor
– C
ompleted
(included
in m
eeting minute distribution em
ail)
P
repared by: M
cCO
RM
ICK
TA
YL
OR
, INC
. M
elody Caron
1
CL
ASH
Circulation Study
Status Meeting
Date:
O
ctober 24, 2007 T
ime:
2:00 PM
L
ocation: H
ampden T
ownship B
uilding
AT
TE
ND
EE
S R
EP
RE
SEN
TIN
G
PH
ON
E
E
MA
IL
T
erry Adam
s
PennD
OT
District 8-0
717-787-7144 teadam
John K
ennedy
PennD
OT
District 8-0
717-783-5119 johnkenned@
state.pa.us C
hip Millard
T
CR
PC
/HA
TS
717-234-2638
cmillard@
tcrpc-pa.org
Kirk S
toner
Cum
berland County
717-240-5381 kstoner@
ccpa.net
Michael G
ossert H
ampden T
ownship
717-761-0119 m
gossert@ham
pdentownship.us
Jerry Spease
H
ampden T
ownship
717-761-0119 jspease@
hampdentow
nship.us D
orota Shirska
H
ampden T
ownship
717-761-0119 K
eith Metts
H
ampden T
ownship
717-761-0119 km
etts@ham
pdentownship.us
Dan F
lint
Low
er Allen T
ownship
717-975-7575 daniel_flint@
lower-allen.pa.us
Tom
Helm
Harrisburg B
icycle Club 717-975-0925
tomhelm
@paonline.com
B
rian St. John
M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 bstjohn@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
Rob W
atts
McC
ormick T
aylor 717-540-6040
rjwatts@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
Doug M
aneval
McC
ormick T
aylor 717-540-6040
demaneval@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
Brandon S
todart M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 bpstodart@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
AT
TA
CH
ME
NT
S
The follow
ing items w
ere presented/distributed at the meeting and are included in the attachm
ent section at the end of the m
eeting minutes:
1. 2020 N
o-Build Im
provements
2. 2030 N
o-Build Im
provements
3. T
ruck O-D
Graphic
4. T
ruck O-D
Results
5. 2007 E
xisting Intersection Conditions
6. 2020 N
o-Build Intersection C
onditions 7.
2030 No-B
uild Intersection Conditions
8. Im
provements G
raphic* * D
ue to the size of the Improvem
ent Graphic, it has been uploaded to a project specific ftp site. T
o access the site, please use the follow
ing link and input the supplied username and passw
ord when
prompted. T
he file can then be copied/downloaded from
the site. ftp://clash:project@
ftp.mccorm
icktaylor.com
U
sername:
clash Passw
ord: project
ME
ET
ING
DISC
USSIO
N
The m
eeting was held as a status m
eeting on the progress of work for the C
LA
SH
Circulation Study.
2
Future T
raffic Volum
es 1.
The m
eeting began with brief introductions and the distribution of handouts. B
rian St. John
explained that the purpose of the meeting w
as to share the results of the of the truck O-D
study, the N
o-Build V
olume P
rojections for 2020 and 2030, initial alternatives for improvem
ent for both 2020 and 2030, pedestrian and bicycle im
provements, and also to discuss the next steps for analysis as
well as the public m
eeting. T
ruck O-D
Results
2. B
rian explained that the truck O-D
study results were based on a random
sample of truck data
collected for a 10 hour day. This inform
ation can be found in Attachm
ents 3 and 4. Mike G
ossert questioned the num
ber of trucks traveling EB
and WB
onto the Carlisle P
ike at the Gatew
ay intersection and asked that the num
ber of trucks at this intersection be verified and provided; Action
Item #1.
3. T
he group discussed the equality of inbound and outbound trucks as well as the consistency of the
observed “truck routes” being within the general perception of traffic flow
in the study area. All
were in agreem
ent that the truck routes were effectively represented. C
hip Millard asked for the
original graphic containing the intersection numbers to be attached to the m
inutes so that the results of the O
-D study can be com
pared and the travel paths can be more easily visualized; A
ction Item
#2. 2020 N
o-Build V
olumes
4. Figures illustrating the 2020 N
o Build traffic volum
es for the morning and afternoon peak hours
were distributed, A
ttachment 6. R
ob Watts described the m
odeling/forecasting process and the refinem
ents that were used in order to arrive at the final anticipated volum
es. The group’s m
ain concerns dealt w
ith the effect of the completed 15-581 Interchange project on the local C
LA
SH
study area netw
ork. The im
provements associated w
ith the 15-581 Interchange Project can be found
in Attachm
ent 1 and are labeled 2020 No-B
uild Improvem
ents. At the request of the group, if
possible a check of the O-D
’s in the model should be perform
ed to help determine the specific
effects of the 15-581 Interchange Project on the C
LA
SH
study area; Action Item
#3. 5.
There w
as significant discussion on the causes of the volume increases throughout the study area.
The group also discussed the influence of the at-grade rail crossings and possible rem
edies to the congestion created w
hen trains completely block som
e of the major roadw
ays in the area (i.e. St.
John’s Church R
oad). 2030 N
o-Build V
olumes
6. Figures illustrating the 2030 N
o Build traffic volum
es for the morning and afternoon peak hours
were distributed, A
ttachment 7. R
ob Watts detailed the assum
ptions that were used in creating the
2030 projections, including the improvem
ents on the Long R
ange Transportation P
lan (LR
TP
) to T
rindle Road and Sporting H
ill Road. A
complete list of these assum
ptions can be found in A
ttachment 2 and is labeled 2030 N
o-Build Im
provements. D
iscussion followed concerning w
hat
3
improvem
ents were on the L
RT
P and w
hich of these improvem
ents are likely to be built by 2020 and/or 2030 projection years.
7. M
ike Gossert added that one of the im
provements on the L
RT
P is to com
plete the connection along Sporting H
ill Road betw
een Trindle R
oad and Simpson Ferry R
oad, and to include a bridge over the rail-crossing. T
he group discussed the impacts, constraints, and lim
itations of such a project and concluded that the Sporting H
ill Road bridge should be added into the 2030 B
uild Option analysis
and not included in the current No B
uild projections; Action Item
#4. 8.
Mike added that significant im
provements are planned w
ithin the next 5 years for the intersection of Sporting H
ill Road and T
rindle Road. T
hese improvem
ents would include the re-zoning of the
property south of Trindle R
oad. This area w
ill be built by 2020 and as such should be included in the 2020 N
o Build A
nalysis; Action Item
#5. The group agreed upon the follow
ing improvem
ents to be included in the m
odel: •
the development of the property south of T
rindle Road in the 2020 N
o-Build
Analysis.
• the connection along Sporting H
ill in the 2030 Build A
nalysis. •
the bridge project over the rail crossing in the 2030 Build A
nalysis. Initial A
lternatives for 2020 and 2030 Projects
9. B
rian initiated the discussion concerning the suggested improvem
ents for 2020 and 2030 by inform
ing the group that the main focus w
as on signalized intersections with L
evel of Service “F” in
the 2020 and 2030 No B
uild. Unsignalized intersections w
ith LO
S of “f” had recom
mendations
such as signalizing and adding turn lanes. The 2020 N
o-Build and 2030 N
o-Build A
ttachments
detail the intersection LO
S in both the A
M and P
M peak periods.
10. The discussion began w
ith the 2020 Build A
lternatives for the intersections of US
15 and the C
arlisle Pike and U
S 15 and T
rindle Road. N
ote: All im
provement suggestions are illustrated in
Attachm
ent 8.
• T
he basic improvem
ents included adding turn lanes and lengthening the existing turn lanes. O
ne of the improvem
ent suggestions included removing the U
S 15 N
B left turn onto the
Carlisle P
ike and the US
15 SB
left turn onto Trindle R
oad. This w
ould allow for a m
ore efficient use of the signal cycle tim
e to incorporate the pedestrian phases and allow m
ore green tim
e for the thru movem
ents on US
15.
• In the discussion that follow
ed, the main concerns focused on the high volum
e of school children w
hich use these intersections, the ease of breaking the normal pedestrian flow
at these tw
o intersections, and the future impacts of the current 15-581 project on these
intersections. The discussion continued w
ith sugg estions ranging from im
proving the signal tim
ing/coordination along US
15 to connecting the parking lots of CV
S and Starbucks to
improve the m
ovement of vehicles off-street.
•
The question of R
OW
acquisition involved with the addition of turn lanes w
as raised, but the m
ain thought of the group was to im
prove the signal timings, further investigate the
4
influences of the new 15-581 project on these tw
o intersections, and to investigate the ability to im
prove off-street traffic flow and its influence on the operations of the intersections.
Significant projects outside of the RO
W should not be investigated in detail.
11. Tw
o 2020 Build A
lternatives for the intersection of Orr’s B
ridge/Central B
oulevard and Carlisle
Pike w
ere provided.
• T
he first alternative was to im
prove the existing intersection configuration by adding turn lanes w
ith the second alternative being to completely re-route O
rr’s Bridge R
oad. It was
noted in the meeting that O
rr’s Bridge is on the list of bridges to be replaced. T
he initial proposed re-alignm
ent was to the w
est of the current alignment, but after discussion w
ith the group it w
as dropped due to the problems that w
ould be faced with the public concerns in
the neighborhood north of Carlisle P
ike.
• D
uring the discussion, other alternatives such as tunneling under Carlisle P
ike or re-routing O
rr’s Bridge to the east w
ere also discussed. The general consensus of the group w
as that further analysis and investigation of the effects on C
entral Boulevard and the possible future
ramps at PA
581 and Central B
oulevard should be studied to determine the m
ost appropriate intersection configuration of O
rr’s Bridge/C
entral Boulevard and C
arlisle Pike.
12. For the intersection of Sporting Hill and C
arlisle Pike, lengthening the N
B double left at Sporting
Hill is being considered and it is under total group agreem
ent that this should be carried out. In addition it is the general thought that the addition/lengthening of the E
B right turn lane should be
carried under the PA
581 Bridge.
13. The alternatives for the C
arlisle Pike/P
A 581 O
ff-ramp/G
ateway included a slight reconfiguration
and new signal tim
ings. The southbound m
ovement along the P
A 581 O
ff-ramp w
as suggested to be changed to triple right-turn lanes and signalized rather than a channelized yield condition. T
his w
ould improve operations of the entire signal, im
prove safety, and improve the current lane
utilization. 14. A
n alternative for Sporting Hill R
oad was also discussed involving the realignm
ent of Sporting Hill
to coincide with the P
A 581 O
ff-ramps. T
his idea was put aside until further inform
ation can be gathered on the future plans for N
aval occupancy of the base. 15. T
he 2020 Build A
lternative for the intersection of Gettysburg R
oad and Wesley D
rive included realigning eastbound G
ettysburg to Century D
rive, and removing all access to the intersection from
eastbound G
ettysburg, thus turning the intersection into a “T.” T
his should be included in the 2020 and 2030 im
provements. T
his is part of a development that is occurring on the w
est side of Wesley
Drive.
16. Minor
improvem
ents w
ere suggested
for G
ettysburg R
oad and
Slate
Hill
Road,
since this
intersection will be updated as part of the 15-581 P
roject. The intersection of S
heely Lane and
Trindle R
oad will require a property displacem
ent on the southeastern corner of the intersection in order to add the necessary turn lanes and intersection im
provements. T
he intersection of St. John’s
Church R
oad and Trindle R
oad has a limited am
ount of improvem
ent choices based on the current
5
operations and configuration. This intersection w
ill need to be addressed by the interchange options.
New
Interchange 17. T
he new proposed ram
p alignment for the com
pletion of the interchange at Trindle R
oad/Central
Boulevard and P
A 581 w
as presented to the comm
ittee.
• T
he design benefits from it’s avoidance of all historic resources, but the fact that the
entry/exit ramps are at different locations is detrim
ental to its acceptance. There w
as significant discussion concerning the ram
p, including the interchange spacing along PA
581 and w
hether or not it meets FH
WA
requirements as w
ell as the specific location of the entrance and exit ram
ps. •
Questions w
ere raised concerning the feasibility of putting the ramp on S
t. John’s Church
Road and the R
OW
requirements that w
ould be associated with such an alignm
ent. Chip
Millard questioned the influence of the ram
p configuration on the Central B
oulevard/Orr’s
Bridge R
oad corridor and raised concern on any proposed re-alignment of O
rr’s Bridge and
its effects not only on this corridor but on the adjacent neighborhood and the movem
ent of traffic to and from
the Carlisle P
ike from T
rindle Road.
Pedestrian and T
ransit Options for Initial A
lternatives 18. T
he current sidewalk locations w
ere presented to the group along with the proposed connections to
complete the sidew
alk “network” in A
ttachment 8. C
hip Millard requested a copy of the current
sidewalk locations for T
ri-County; A
ction Item #6. C
hip also questioned the presence of sidewalk
and/or the traffic volumes w
ithin the neighborhood bounded by the Carlisle P
ike, US
15, Trindle
Road, and S
t. John’s Church R
oad. It was noted that traffic volum
es are low enough w
ithin these neighborhoods to allow
pedestrian movem
ents along the shoulders. 19. T
here was som
e discussion over the proposed sidewalk locations and the need to prioritize these
locations based on the following criteria: transit routes, proxim
ity to various shopping areas, and proxim
ity of various neighborhoods. It was noted that at each intersection w
here improvem
ents w
ere proposed, AD
A and push-buttons w
ill all be brought up to current requirements.
Additional O
ptions for Analysis
20. Terry
Adam
s noted
that w
ith the
increased interest in improving the existing roadw
ays and addressing
Structurally
Deficient
bridges, it
will
be necessary
to identify
and quantify
the need/benefit for the full interchange at the P
A 581/C
entral Boulevard/T
rindle Road area.
21. There w
as a lengthy discussion dealing with the need for a thorough analysis of the effects of the
15-581 Interchange Project on the C
LA
SH
network, and w
hat suggested alternatives from the
CL
AS
H project w
ill have the best result on the improvem
ent of the overall area. The com
mittee
requested that the analysis of the 15-581 interchange effects on the CL
AS
H netw
ork including the diverted traffic from
the CL
AS
H netw
ork and the relief to the network created by the 15-581
improvem
ents be documented.
6
Next Steps
22. In preparing for the public meeting, no cost estim
ates should be shown, and the basic im
provement
concepts should be presented. It was determ
ined that the public meeting should be held after the
holiday season with a tentative date during the w
eek of January 14th and a snow
date during the w
eek of January 21st. A
write-up advertising the public m
eeting is needed for the Decem
ber 1st
newsletter; A
ction Item #7.
23. Brian concluded the m
eeting and noted the dry-run for the public meeting w
ould be scheduled betw
een Thanksgiving and C
hristmas. T
he meeting ended at approxim
ately 5:00 PM
. 24. Subsequent to the m
eeting, the Public Meeting w
as scheduled for Wednesday, January 23rd w
ith a snow
date of January 24th in the Ham
pden Tow
nship Em
ergency Services B
uilding, 295 S.
Sporting Hill R
oad, directly across from the T
ownship building. T
he meeting w
ill likely be between
5-8pm
Follow
up Items
Action :
To be com
pleted by: Date C
ompleted:
1. Verify and Provide the E
B and W
B truck
volumes at C
arlisle Pike/PA
581 Off-ram
p/Gatew
ay M
cCorm
ick Taylor
2. Attach the overview
map w
ith intersection num
bers. M
cCorm
ick Taylor
11/30/07
3. Determ
ine the specific effect of the 15-581 Interchange P
roject on the CL
AS
H study area.
McC
ormick T
aylor
4. Add the Sporting H
ill Road bridge to the 2030
Build O
ptions M
cCorm
ick Taylor
5. Include the re-zoned and built-out area south of T
rindle at Sporting Hill R
oad in 2020/2030 No-
Build A
nalysis M
cCorm
ick Taylor
6. Send T
ri-County a copy of the current S
idewalk
Locations M
ap. (In Attachm
ent 8) M
cCorm
ick Taylor
11/30/07
7. Provide a write-up advertising the public m
eeting the w
eek of January 14th
McC
ormick T
aylor 11/7/07
Prepared by:
McC
OR
MIC
K T
AY
LO
R, IN
C.
Brandon P
. Stodart
1
CL
ASH
Circulation Study
Status Meeting
Date:
D
ecember 18, 2007
Tim
e: 9:00 A
M
Location:
Ham
pden Tow
nship Building
A
TT
EN
DE
ES
RE
PR
ESE
NT
ING
P
HO
NE
EM
AIL
Chip M
illard
TC
RP
C/H
AT
S
717-234-2638 cm
K
irk Stoner
C
umberland C
ounty 717-240-5381
M
ichael Gossert
Ham
pden Tow
nship 717-761-0119
mgossert@
hampdentow
nship.us D
an Flint
L
ower A
llen Tow
nship 717-975-7575
daniel_flint@low
er-allen.pa.us Jerry S
pease
Ham
pden Tow
nship 717-761-0119
jspease@ham
pdentownship.us
Scott A
kens
Shirem
anstown B
orough 717-975-9933 scott@
akensengineering.com
Gary K
line
Borough of C
amp H
ill 717-737-3456
camphillm
anager@com
cast.net R
obert Gill
E
ast Pennsboro T
ownship 717-732-011
admin@
eastpennsboro.net R
yan Murray
E
ast Pennsboro T
ownship 717-571-4978
rmm
urray@m
smary.edu
Brian S
t. John
McC
ormick T
aylor 717-540-6040
bstjohn@m
ccormicktaylor.com
L
aura Montgom
ery M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 lam
ontgomery@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
Melody M
atter
McC
ormick T
aylor 717-540-6040
mam
atter@m
ccormicktaylor.com
M
EE
TIN
G D
ISCU
SSION
T
he meeting w
as held as a dry-run for the CL
AS
H C
irculation Study Public Meeting to be held on
January 23, 2008. 1.
The m
eeting began with brief introductions and the distribution of handouts. B
rian St. John
explained that the purpose of the meeting w
as to discuss the progress in determining vehicle
attraction to improved U
S 15/PA
581 Interchange and a completed P
A 581/C
entral Boulevard
Interchange, review the public m
eeting layout and displays, and to discuss the contents of the C
LA
SH
Circulation Study report.
Attraction of 15/581 Im
provements and Full 581/C
entral Boulevard Interchange
2. A
t the last status meeting, the com
mittee requested the analysis of the effects the U
S 15/PA
581 interchange im
provements and the effects of a com
pleted PA
581/Central B
oulevard Interchange on the C
LA
SH
network. B
rian St. John explained that determ
ining the attraction and diversion shifts has been delayed due to revisions that needed to be m
ade to the regional model. W
hen reviewing
the model som
e errors were noted in the vehicle path and trip assignm
ents. These errors did not
affect the traffic volumes on a m
acro scale, but on a micro scale, such as trip diversion, these errors
need to be addressed to achieve reliable results. Brian noted that R
ob Watts is w
orking with T
ri-C
ounty to address the noted errors and Tri-C
ounty will be providing an updated m
odel run later in the w
eek. Once the effects of the interchanges are determ
ined the results will be distributed to the
comm
ittee. Action #1.
2
Public Meeting D
isplay (Pow
er Point and Handouts)
3. T
he public meeting w
ill be held at Ham
pden Tow
nship’s Em
ergency Service building w
hich is located across the street from
the Tow
nship’s building. The m
eeting will be opened to the general
public from 5:00-8: 00 P
M. L
aura Montgom
ery questioned if a public officials meeting should be
held prior to the general public meeting. T
he comm
ittee discussed and agreed that a public officials m
eeting should be held from 4:00-5:00 P
M. L
aura agreed to generate a list of potential public officials to invite for the com
mittee to review
and also agreed to draft a letter inviting them to the
meeting. A
ction Item #2 and #3. T
he comm
ittee noted that the letter to the public officials should be from
Tri-C
ounty. 4.
The setup and layout of the public m
eeting displays were show
n to the comm
ittee in a power point
format. E
ach slide/board set was review
ed and as the comm
ittee provided comm
ents the text was
updated accordingly. As the size of the m
apping that could be shown of the pow
er point slides was
limited, larger exam
ples were rolled out for review
. Chip M
illard requested that the intersection num
bers be shown larger on the area m
ap and that a list of intersections with their associated
numbers be provided on the m
ap, Action Item
#4 and #5. 5.
In discussing the truck travel displays, Brian S
t. John noted that as a follow-up item
to the last status m
eeting, the number of trucks traveling eastbound and w
estbound onto the Carlisle P
ike at the G
ateway intersection w
as added to the truck origin and destination result figure. 6.
An exam
ple figure of the intersection improvem
ent displays was show
n to the comm
ittee. Brian S
t. John explained that the level of service and environm
ental information that w
ould be added to the text boxes at the bottom
of the figures was included in the handouts that w
ere distributed. 7.
The com
mittee suggested that a “N
ext Steps” board be added to the public m
eeting displays; Action
Item #6.
Public Meeting P
resentation 8.
Brian S
t. John gave an overview of the presentation that he w
ill give at the public meeting. It w
as determ
ined that the presentation would only be given once at 6:00 P
M, and the tim
e of the presentation w
ould be noted in the meeting advertisem
ents. 9.
Within the presentation B
rian St. John w
ill discuss some of the study intersections and w
ill direct the public to visit the display boards for m
ore detailed information about intersection im
provements.
Public M
eeting Survey
10. To assist in prioritizing projects and gauging public concern, a survey w
ill be distributed at the public m
eeting. Laura M
ontgomery review
ed the survey with the com
mittee. C
hip Millard
suggested that a study area map be attached to the survey and be on a display board adjacent to the
survey area. The com
mittee suggested that a m
ailing address be address be added on the back of the survey so the public w
ould not feel rushed to complete it and could m
ail it in; Action Item
#7. A
dvertisements for Public M
eeting 11. L
aura Montgom
ery noted that the Carlisle S
entinel and the Patriot New
s would be contacted about
placing an advertisement in the papers. In addition, K
irk Stoner suggested that Laura contact both
3
newspapers to have a full article ran on the project and the up com
ing public meeting; A
ction Item
#8. 12. T
he comm
ittee also suggested that a press release be given to PennD
OT
, have an announcement on
the associated Municipality’s w
ebsites, and try to include an announcement in the associated
Municipality’s up com
ing newsletters. A
ction Item #9.
Set-up for Final R
eport 13. T
he table of contents of the CL
AS
H C
irculation Study report was circulated to the com
mittee.
Brian S
t. John explained that the report will be set-up based on the outline show
n. It was
recomm
ended that the final report be posted on Tri-C
ounty’s and the associated Municipality’s
website. O
nce the report is finalized, Brian agreed to provide a P
DF so the report can be posted on
the websites; A
ction Item #10.
Next S
teps 14. A
s several items w
ere presented in a draft format, the graphics that w
ill be displayed at the public m
eeting including all intersection improvem
ents will posted on M
cCorm
ick Taylor’s w
ebsite for the com
mittee to review
and provide comm
ents. Laura M
ontgomery noted so there is tim
e for the boards to be prepared, com
ments w
ould need to be received by Wednesday January 16
th. T
his concludes these meeting m
inutes. Any revisions or additions to these m
eeting minutes should be
sent within seven (7) w
orking days of their receipt. At that tim
e, they will becom
e part of the official m
inutes of the meeting.
Minutes P
repared by: M
cCorm
ick Taylor, Inc.
Melody M
atter, P.E
., PT
OE
C
C:
All attendees, T
. Adam
s, A. W
rightstone, J. Bradley, J. E
by
4
Follow
up Items
Action :
To be com
pleted by: 1. D
istribute to the comm
ittee the results of the effects of the U
S 15/PA
581 Interchange im
provements and the com
pletion of the PA
581/C
entral Boulevard Interchange.
McC
ormick T
aylor
2. Generate a list of potential public officials to be
invited to the public officials meeting.
McC
ormick T
aylor
3. Draft a letter inviting the public officials to the
public officials meeting.
McC
ormick T
aylor
4. Show intersection num
bers on the study area m
ap. M
cCorm
ick Taylor
5. Provide a list of intersections with their
associated numbers on the study area m
ap. M
cCorm
ick Taylor
6. Add a “N
ext Steps” board to the public m
eeting displays.
McC
ormick T
aylor
7. Add a m
ailing address on the back of the public m
eeting survey. M
cCorm
ick Taylor
8. Contact the local new
spapers about running a full article ran on the project and the up com
ing public m
eeting.
McC
ormick T
aylor
9. Give P
ennDO
T a press release, have an
announcement on the associated M
unicipality’s w
ebsites, and try to include an announcement in the
associated Municipality’s up com
ing newsletters.
McC
ormick
Taylor/M
unicipalities
10. Provide a PD
F of the final report so it can be posted on T
ri-County’s and the associated
Municipality’s w
ebsites.
McC
ormick T
aylor
1
CL
ASH
Circulation Study
Status Meeting
Date:
M
ay 15, 2008 T
ime:
1:00 PM
L
ocation: H
ampden T
ownship B
uilding
AT
TE
ND
EE
S R
EP
RE
SEN
TIN
G
PH
ON
E
E
MA
IL
M
ichael Gossert
Ham
pden Tow
nship 717-761-0119
mgossert@
hampdentow
nship.us G
reg Creasy
G
rove Miller
717-564-6146
gcreasy@grovem
iller.com
Jerry Spease
H
ampden T
ownship
717-761-0119 jspease@
hampdentow
nship.us John E
by
Low
er Allen T
ownship
717-975-7575 john_eby@
lower-allen.pa.us
Al S
undara
Tri-C
ounty RP
C
717-234-2639 asundara@
tcrcp-pa.org T
erry Adam
s
PennD
OT
District 8
717-787-7149 teadam
Brian S
t. John
McC
ormick T
aylor 717-540-6040
bstjohn@m
ccormicktaylor.com
M
elody Matter
M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 m
amatter@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
Brandon S
todart M
cCorm
ick Taylor
717-540-6040 bpstodart@
mccorm
icktaylor.com
ME
ET
ING
DISC
USSIO
N
The m
eeting was held as the Final M
eeting for the CL
AS
H C
irculation Study Project.
The m
eeting began with brief introductions and the distribution of handouts. B
rian St. John explained
that the purpose of the meeting w
as to review the Public M
eeting and to discuss the Intersection Im
provement P
ackages as developed by McC
ormick T
aylor. 1.
Review
of Public M
eeting
Based on the Public M
eeting Survey R
esponses, the following intersections w
ere listed as the top problem
locations in the CL
AS
H Study A
rea: �
Carlisle P
ike and Orr’s B
ridge Road/C
entral Boulevard
� C
arlisle Pike and S
t. John’s Church R
oad �
Trindle R
oad (PA
641) and Central B
oulevard �
Carlisle P
ike and Sporting Hill R
oad �
Carlisle P
ike/Market S
treet and 32nd Street (U
S 11/15)
Terry A
dams rem
inded the group that the intersections should be looked at in their relationship to the entire corridor rather than as a specific location. A
general discussion concerning accident history in relation to a properly tim
ed corridor ensued and everyone was in agreem
ent that properly tim
ed signals are safer and more efficient.
2
Brian review
ed the public’s suggestions for possible new routes and new
lane configurations at several locations throughout the study area. M
ost of these did not occur at the specific study intersections. T
he comm
ittee discussed Intersection #21 Industrial Drive and S
t. John’s Road and how
a signal is needed A
SA
P. R
equests for a signal have been received from som
e of the trucking com
panies and it is thought that the 15-581 Project w
ill increase the number of m
otorists looking for alternative routes and consequently the traffic volum
e on St. John’s C
hurch Road.
2. R
eview of Interchange traffic im
pacts
Brian handed out all of the intersection and interchange im
provement packages. T
he comm
ittee expressed the m
ost interest in the Interchange Concepts, including the cost and im
pacts. Brian
revealed the advantages and costs of each of the two concepts, including w
hat was considered
during the concept development and w
hat was not considered. M
ike Gossart expressed
significant interest in the Interchange and directed the discussion to the right-of-way im
pacts as show
n in the developed concepts as well as w
hat engineering would be involved in the concepts.
The group discussed the cost/benefit of the interchange concept versus the intersection
improvem
ents. T
erry Adam
s informed the com
mittee that there is potential funding available for som
e of the projects under different groupings. M
ike expressed concern over further delay in proceeding forw
ard with any of the projects due to the availability of funding in the current T
IP process.
Terry rem
inded the comm
ittee that PennD
OT
’s primary concern is w
ith replacing bridges and upgrading existing facilities, rather than w
ith programm
ing new interchange projects and that it
would be beneficial to m
ove forward w
ith the intersection improvem
ents in place of pushing for the interchange concept developm
ent. 3.
Concept P
ackages Developm
ent
Brian brought up the need to prioritize the intersection im
provement packages and group them
together into project packages. H
e introduced a spreadsheet to the comm
ittee (for their use) to com
e up with overall project cost estim
ates for specific groupings. T
he comm
ittee discussed and agreed that more tim
e was needed to look over and talk through
all of the information that w
as presented. In addition, due to the absence of some of the C
LA
SH
P
roject Stakeholders, it w
as advised that all mem
bers have adequate time to digest the
improvem
ent packages and associated cost estimates (and the public’s concerns as voiced at the
Public Meeting). B
rian will em
ail the spreadsheet cost estimates and packages to the entire
comm
ittee; Action Item
1. A
l Sundara talked through the general HA
TS
prioritization process and advised that HA
TS
w
ould look favorably on recomm
endations from a com
mittee such as C
LA
SH
. Al w
ill research how
the results of the planning study from C
LA
SH
would be used by T
ri-County R
CP
and what
format w
ould be best for the comm
ittee to provide; Action Item
2.
3
At the request of the com
mittee, the num
ber of vehicles through each intersection (or some
similar and adequate m
easure) should be used to develop a cost-benefit comparison; A
ction Item
3. This w
ill be us ed in addition to the information currently provided to assist in
determining the priority of intersection im
provements based partly on the num
ber of people that w
ill benefit from a specific im
provement.
4. F
inal Report Schedule
T
he final report was not discussed at the current m
eeting and as such will not be presented to
HA
TS
on June 13, 2008. The draft version of the final report should be sent via em
ail to the com
mittee m
embers for their review
; Action Item
4. 5.
Next Steps
T
he next steps will be discussed via em
ail after all comm
ittee mem
bers have had time to review
the inform
ation provided at this meeting.
This concludes these m
eeting minutes. A
ny revisions or additions to these meeting m
inutes should be sent w
ithin seven (7) working days of their receipt. A
t that time, they w
ill become part of the official
minutes of the m
eeting. M
inutes Prepared by:
McC
ormick T
aylor, Inc. B
randon P. S
todart, MS
, EIT
C
C:
All attendees
4
Follow
up Items
A
ction : T
o be completed by:
1. Em
ail the spreadsheets cost estimates and im
provement
packages along with the overall cost estim
ate spreadsheet to all com
mittee m
embers.
McC
ormick T
aylor
2. Research how
the results of the planning study from C
LA
SH
w
ould be used by Tri-C
ounty RC
P.
Al Sundara
3. Develop a cost-benefit com
parison for each intersection im
provement.
McC
ormick T
aylor
4. Em
ail a draft version of the final report to all comm
ittee m
embers.
McC
ormick T
aylor
Intersectio
n:
Date:
Perfo
rmed
by:
Co
ntro
ller Assem
bly In
form
ation
:
Controller:
Conflict M
onitor:
Detector A
mps:
Detector A
mps N
umber:
5; 4
Phase A
ssembly:
Detectors W
orking?:G
eneral Assem
bly Condition:
(Good/F
air/Poor)
Notes:
Intersectio
n In
stallation
Info
rmatio
n:
Signal H
ead Size:
Mast A
rm C
ondition:
Pedestrian A
ccomm
odations:
Pavem
ent Marking C
ondition:
General A
ssembly C
ondition:(G
ood/Fair/P
oor)
Notes:
good
good
Ped xings all legs - ram
ps on 2 corners - curb on 2 others
good
All 12 phase positions used
12 position backpanel
good
yes
ED
I NS
M-12
Detector S
ystems 913A
-SS
& 921-2
Eq
uip
men
t Inven
tory S
heet
Carlisle P
k, Van P
atten & H
oliday InnM
ay 3, 2007D
EM
/WS
B/B
PS
Multisonics 820A
Intersectio
n:
Date:
Perfo
rmed
by:
Co
ntro
ller Assem
bly In
form
ation
:
Controller:
Conflict M
onitor:
Detector A
mps:
Detector A
mps N
umber:
14
Phase A
ssembly:
Detectors W
orking?:G
eneral Assem
bly Condition:
(Good/F
air/Poor)
Notes:
Intersectio
n In
stallation
Info
rmatio
n:
Signal H
ead Size:
Mast A
rm C
ondition:
Pedestrian A
ccomm
odations:
Pavem
ent Marking C
ondition:
General A
ssembly C
ondition:(G
ood/Fair/P
oor)
Notes:
ED
I NS
M-12
ED
I LM301
Eq
uip
men
t Inven
tory S
heet
good
Carlisle P
k, Gatew
ay & R
amps
May 3, 2007
DE
M/W
SB
/BP
S
Multisonics 820A
12 position backpanel
yes
No crossings on all legs
6 phase positions usedE
VP
on all approaches
good
good
good