1
2
3
3020 Columbia Avenue, Lancaster, PA 17603
MEMORANDUM
4
5
TO:
Kise Straw & Kolodner
FROM:
Timothy J. Staub, AICP
DATE:
November 24, 2008
PROJECT NAME:
SUBJECT:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Phone: (717) 394-3721 Fax: (717) 394-1063
E-mail: [email protected] • Web site: www.rettew.com
Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway PROJECT NO.:
08-06412-001
Corridor Study
TEW will prepare a technical memorandu
Traffic, Biking, and Pedestrian Circulation Analysis
There is a wide variety of ways to access the beauty of the Brandywine Scenic Byway including driving,
bicycling, walking or simply enjoying the view from a pleasant spot beside the road. All modes are
important to provide accessibility to the Corridor without adding undue traffic congestion to local
roadways, most of which were built long before the auto was a primary mode of transportation. The
following report provides a background picture of transportation as it relates to previous planning,
safety, and connectivity of the Corridor so as to prepare for future transportation plans associated with
the preparation of the Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway Corridor Study.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PREVIOUS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Transportation planning is not new to the Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway study area. In fact
references and recommended improvements to the roads within the Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway
Corridor can be found in Chester County’s Comprehensive Plan, in the municipal comprehensive plans,
in regional comprehensive plans, in specific transportation studies, such as the Kennett Area Regional
Transportation Study and in municipal official maps.
Specific recommendations stemming from these documents are listed in the following Figure 1 (KSK
may wish to develop supporting map of projects):
26
27
28
Figure 1: Previous Planning Study Recommendations
Specific Recommendation
Brandywine Trail Rt 1- Rt52- Construct trail
Municipality
Birmingham
Township
Rt 926 over Brandywine Creek- replacement
Birmingham
Township
Pursue roadway de-designation of Rt 52
East
Bradford
Township
Rehabilitate Cope’s Bridge
East
Bradford
Township
Rt 322, Creek Rd & Frank Road- Improve intersection East
Bradford
alignment.
Township
North Creek Rd & Rt 162- improve sight distance East
Bradford
looking west on Rt 162 at the intersection of North Creek Township
Rd and Rt 162.
Manage Access to Rt 52
Planning Document
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
East
Bradford
Township Strategic
Comprehensive Plan
Update (2004)
East
Bradford
Township Strategic
Comprehensive Plan
Update (2004)
East
Bradford
Township Strategic
Comprehensive Plan
Update (2004)
East
Bradford
Township Strategic
Comprehensive Plan
Update (2004)
East
Bradford East
Bradford
Township
Township Strategic
Comprehensive Plan
Update (2004)
Brandywine Byway Bikepaths- add bicycle lanes East
Bradford Chester
County
adjacent to Byway
Township
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Rt 162, Strasburg Rd (Copes Bridge) - Bridge East
Bradford Delaware
Valley
rehabilitation.
Township & West Regional
Planning
Bradford
Commission
TIP
Township
(2008)
Specific Recommendation
Municipality
Brandywine Trail Bicycle PA “L”- construction of a East
Bradford
multi-use trail
Township & West
Bradford
Township
Northbrook Rd over West BR Brandywine Creek- West
Bradford
Replace or rehabilitate
Township
Planning Document
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
TIP
(2008)
Rt 52 Relocation
East Marlborough
Township, Kennett
Township,
&
Pennsbury
Township
PA 82 Trail: PA 926 to Doe Run Rd- Add Bicycle Lanes
East Marlborough Chester
County
Township
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Rt 52 Relocation- Rt 1 to Rt 926
Kennett Township
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Rt 52- PA 52 Bikeway add bike lanes
Kennett Township
Rt 52 & Burrows Run Rd
Kennett Township
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Rt 1 & Rt. 52 (NB) - Retime/ adjust signal, striping and Kennett Township
signing.
Specific Recommendation
Rt 52 & Rt. 52 Connector
Municipality
Kennett Township
Rt 1 & Rt. 52 Connector- Increase left turn lane storage Kennett Township
on SB Route 1.
Rt 52 & Hillendale- Signalize and add lanes
Kennett Township
Rt 52 & Hickory Hill Rd- Monitor the intersection. Pennsbury
Signalization should be considered as a form of Township
mitigation.
Rt 52 & Fairville Rd- Monitor the intersection. Pennsbury
Signalization should be considered as a form of Township
mitigation.
Rt 52 & Fairville Rd- A traffic calming study should be Pennsbury
conducted.
Township
Route 52 & Rt 926- Realignment
Pennsbury
Township
Rt 926 over Pocopson Creek- replacement
Pennsbury
Township
S. Creek Road over Brandywine Creek (Twin Bridge)- Pennsbury
Bridge replacement
Township
Rt 52 & Pocopson Rd- Monitor the intersection. Pocopson
Signalization should be considered as a form of Township
mitigation.
Rt 52 & Lenape-Unionville Rd- Monitor the intersection. Pocopson
Signalization should be considered as a form of Township
mitigation.
Planning Document
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Pennsbury Township
Comprehensive Plan
(2006)
Pennsbury Township
Comprehensive Plan
(2006)
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Kennet
Area
Regional
Transportation Study
(June 2004 Update)
Specific Recommendation
Municipality
Intersection of Wawaset Rd, Rt 52 and Lenape- Pocopson
Unionville Rd- Signage to direct turning movements and Township
access to the Pocopson Home; Left turn movements in
Wawaset Rd and Lenape-Unionville Rd controlled by
signalization; Continuous left turn lanes on Route 52 in
order to alleviate rear end accidents which occur just to
the north of this intersection; Realignment of Route 52;
Realignment of Wawaset Rd and Lenape-Unionville Rd
to create a single, right angle, intersection with Route 52.
Planning Document
Pocopson Township
Comprehensive Plan
(October 2001)
Intersection of Rt 52 & Pocopson Rd- Monitor the Pocopson
conditions at the intersection and make improvements as Township
necessary.
Capacity improvements to Rt 52
Pocopson
Township
Pocopson Township
Comprehensive Plan
(October 2001)
Pocopson Township
Comprehensive Plan
(October 2001)
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
TIP
(2008)
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Chester
County
Planning
Commission
Transportation
Improvements
Inventory (TII)
Rt 52, Wawaset & Unionville Rd South-One lane Pocopson
roundabout
Township
Rt 52 Roundabout
Pocopson
Township
Rt 52 portion of Pocopson Trail System- add multi-use Pocopson
trail
Township
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Birmingham Township
The Birmingham Township Comprehensive Plan recommends the de-designation of Route 100 as a
numbered legislative route and no longer identified as Route 100. The Plan also states the desire to
increase the number of trails and non-motorized paths throughout the Township including a possible
Trail along Creek Road (Route 100).
Chadds Ford Township
No additional recommendations.
East Bradford Township
Along with specific transportation improvement recommendations, East Bradford Township’s Strategic
Comprehensive Plan Update (2004) encourages improving safety and functionality of the roadways
while maintaining the scenic feel of the road network. The plan specifically calls for the de-designation
of Route 52 and the posting of no through truck traffic signs. The Plan also contemplates increasing nonmotorized transportation throughout the Township and linking those pathways to non-motorized paths in
adjacent municipalities.
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
East Marlborough Township
No additional recommendations.
Pennsbury Township
In addition to the specific recommendations listed in the Pennsbury Township Comprehensive Plan
(2006) the Plan also states that the Township continue to implement the recommendations from
applicable transportation studies such as the U.S. Route 1 Corridor Study (1989), Route 1 Corridor
Improvement Plan (2000) and the Kennett Area Regional Transportation Study (2002). The plan also
recommends that the Township continue to support and participate in the implementation of the
Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway. Would it be worth reviewing these studies as well?
Pennsbury Township’s U.S. Route 1 Corridor Improvement Plan (2000) identifies areas and features of
the Corridor that merit preservation or conservation. It also identifies areas that require municipal
attention. Recommendations stemming from the Plan that could apply to the Brandywine Scenic Byway
Corridor are possibly lowering the speed along Route 1 from 55mph to 45mph to ensure more
compatibility with pedestrian circulation. The Plan also recommends sidewalks on both the north and
south sides of Route 1 and intersection treatments such as crosswalks, bollards and pedestrian amenities.
Pocopson Township
The Pocopson Township Comprehensive Plan (2001) encourages access management especially along
Route 52 which has competing functions. The Plan also states the desire of the Township to preserve the
scenic character of Route 52 while improving the safety along Route 52. The Comprehensive plan also
states the increase in demand for a public transit route that would run along Route 52 between West
Chester and Kennett Square.
Kennett Township
The Kennett Township Comprehensive Plan (2004) specifies the need to balance the benefit of future
road improvements with their potential negative impact on scenic roadways and the need to cooperate
with groups that are protecting scenic roads on a regional basis. The Comprehensive plan also stresses
the need to plan for alternative transportation needs throughout the Township including pedestrian and
bike paths and connect these routes with major centers of activity and recreation.
Chester County
Chester County’s Comprehensive Plan Policy Element (1996) urges local governments to encourage
developers to incorporate designs into their proposals that consider various modes of transportation not
just automobiles. The plan also states that the County will give funding priority to non-motorized
transportation projects.
DVRPC
No additional recommendations.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway Corridor is primarily a 2-lane highway with some enlarged
intersections with turn lanes to improve traffic flow. There are 6 signalized intersections at Route 1 and
Route 52, Route 1 and Kennett Parkway, Unionville Rd and Route 52, Bradford Ave. and Birmingham
Rd., Bradford Ave. and Nield’s St., Bradford Ave. and Strasburg Rd. The lane width is an exception on
a portion of PA Route 1 where the Corridor expands to a 4-lane highway with turning lanes at
intersections. Using existing data sources the Corridor carries between 1,650 to and over 25,538 vehicles
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
per day. The Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) counts for roadways within the Brandywine Valley
Scenic Corridor are listed in figure 2.
Wither’s Way at Creek Road
Route 1 West of Chadd’s Ford
Figure 2: Average Annual Daily Traffic
Location
Rt 1 (from Rt 52 to Lenape Rd)
Rt 52 (from Rt 1 to Street Rd)
Rt 52 (from College Ave to Birmingham Rd)
Rt 52 (from Pennsylvania/Delaware Line to Rt 1)
Rt 52 (from Birmingham Rd to South Creek Rd)
South Creek Rd to Rt 52
North Bradford Ave (from Strasburg Rd to College
Ave)
Rt 52 (from Street Rd to Lenape-Unionville Rd)
Rt 52 (from Lenape-Unionville Rd to South Creek Rd)
Strasburg Rd (from North Creek Rd to North Bradford
Ave)
Creek Rd (from Wylie Rd to Birmingham Township
Border)
South Creek Rd (from Birmingham Township Border to
Rt 1)
South Creek Rd (from Withers Way to W Miner St)
AADT
25,538
13,289
11,675
11,286
11,028
10,562
9,869
Year
2006
2004
2005
2007
2003
2006
2003
9,866
9,604
8,295
2006
2004
2006
3,625
2006
3,537
2006
3,415
2007
South Creek Rd (from West Street Rd to Wylie Rd)
2,866 2006
South Creek Rd (from Rt 1 to Pennsylvania/Delaware
2,514 2006
Line)
Birmingham Rd (from Rt 52 to W Miner St)
2,128 2006
South Creek Rd (from Lenape Rd to West Street Rd)
1,852 2006
South Creek Rd to Withers Way
1,650 2006
Source: Data was obtained from PennDOT’s Internet Traffic Monitoring System (iTMS)
The average annual daily traffic volume counts indicate that Route 1 from Rt 52 to Lenape Rd is the
most travelled route within the Corridor with an AADT of over 25,000 per day. The second highest
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
AADT volume count is Route 52 from Route 1 to Street Rd with an estimated volume of 13,289 trips
per day. The least travelled segment within the Corridor is South Creek Rd to Withers Way with a
volume of 1,650 trips per day.
SAFETY
An analysis of the vehicle accidents and patterns was conducted for the study area using data provided
by PENNDOT for a five year period starting from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2007. The
specific road segments and intersections that were considered include:
 Pa Route 52 at PA Route 1 Segment 53
 Pa Route 52 at PA Route 1 Segment 60
 Pa Route 52 at Street Road ( SR 0926)
 Pa Route 52 at Birmingham Road (SR 2001)
 Pa Route 52 at South Creek Road (SR 3100)
 PA Route 52 at South Creek Road (SR 3071)
Data was also requested for PA Route 52 at College Avenue but no reportable crashes occurred over the
five year period. While no fatalities were recorded over the five year period for the entire Corridor, 105
incidents ranging in severity from major injuries were reported. PA Route 52 and PA Route 1 accounted
for nearly two-thirds of the incidents within the Corridor. As mentioned previously in the Traffic
Volumes section this section of the Corridor is the most heavily travelled portion and also contains the
highest posted speeds. The remaining accidents are primarily attributed with motorists either travelling
too fast for weather conditions or speeding.
Figure 3: Vehicle Incident Type Summary
Type of Incident
Amount
Percentage of Total
automobile/automobile conflict
168
84%
small truck/vehicle conflict
25
12%
large truck/vehicle conflict
5
2%
motorcycle/automobile conflict
2
0.60%
bicycle/vehicle conflict
1
0.40%
bus/automobile conflict
0
0%
pedestrian/vehicle conflict
0
0%
Total
201
100%
Because the Corridor was designed as a collector/arterial roadway to encourage primarily passenger
vehicle movement at higher speeds with minimal consideration of alternative transportation modes the
amount of incidents involving pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and trucks are nominal.
ROADWAY GEOMETRICS
While the Corridor serves as a collector/arterial roadway with design speeds ranging from 35-55 miles
per hour, portions throughout the Corridor contain horizontal and vertical alignment sight distance
concerns which produce safety concerns associated with “blind turns” and accessing the Corridor safely
at the posted speed limits. Several crash incidents were associated with vehicles turning movements
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
entering the Corridor. Specific locations of “blind turns” are discussed below in the Segment Conditions
and Recommendations section of this analysis.
Route 52 looking South
While serving as a collector/arterial roadway primarily for passenger vehicles, portions of the road have
a more rural local road design which does not include extensive right-of-way or shoulders and has
frequent changes in grade. Specific locations are discussed below in the Segment Conditions and
Recommendations section of this analysis. These portions will be difficult for bus and larger truck traffic
to negotiate which may limit the tourism potential of the Corridor in the future. With the exception of
the recreation park locations much of the roadway does not include passing lanes, pull-offs, or parking
areas for individuals wishing to drive slower or stop and experience the unique cultural and scenic
beauty of the Corridor. This could create potential conflicts between the pass-through motorist and the
individuals who wish to travel the Corridor for recreation and tourism purposes.
ACCESS MANAGEMENT
The Brandywine Valley Scenic Byway Corridor contains numerous excellent examples of appropriate
access roads which include: acceleration and deceleration lanes right-in and right-out turning
movements, combined parking lots, improved sight distances and some separate turning lanes. Specific
locations of are discussed below in the Segment Conditions and Recommendations section of this
analysis. Still, these modern access management treatments have been only implemented on a municipal
by municipal level over the past ten to fifteen years. Therefore, in some instances numerous driveway
cuts and other improper access management treatments exist whether by lack of access management
ordinance implementation at the local level or it was a pre-regulatory treatment. While these poor
access management areas detract from the scenic nature of the Corridor it also increases safety concerns
along the Corridor.
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
South Creek Road looking Northbound
CORRIDOR CONNECTIVITY
Aside from getting in their personal automobile, residents and visitors have no other way to travel within
the corridor. While there are designated bicycle routes throughout the Corridor these routes are
designated for the more advanced cyclist where the bicyclist shares the road with motorists with limited
or no shoulders. In addition, there is a lack of sidewalks; if addressed, could reduce the number of
vehicle trips within the Corridor. Further, an extremely limited transit service only services a portion of
the Corridor.
Pedestrian: A lack of sidewalks throughout the Corridor prevents pedestrian movement. There are a few
small areas along the Corridor where sidewalks are present but these are generally in the more urbanized
and commercial areas and do not provide a wide range of connectivity. Additionally, some of the
residential subdivisions contain sidewalks and trails that provide internal connectivity within the
subdivision but they do not connect externally.
Bicycle: There are designated bike routes all along the Brandywine Valley Scenic Corridor with the
exception of Birmingham Road. The majority of the bike routes along the study Corridor are designated
by the County as being either Commuter/Connector Bikeways or as Advanced Bikeways. There is a lack
of beginner and intermediate recreational bikeways throughout the Corridor making accessibility and
safety for the average or inexperienced cyclist difficult. There are no lanes provided for bicyclists either
in the form of a lane within the existing roadway or a separated lane.
Transit: One public transit route, operated by Transportation Management Association of Chester
County, runs along the Corridor; however this route (SCCOOT public transit route Oxford to West
Chester via Longwood) provides only limited service. There has been some discussion in several of the
planning documents mentioned previously in this memo that indicate a desire to create a public transit
route that would run along Route 52 from West Chester to Kennett Square.
SEGMENT CONDITIONS AND RECOOMENDATIONS
The following provides specific conditions of blind turns, access management, grade changes, and rightof-way within specific segments of the Brandywine Valley Scenic Highway Corridor:
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
South Creek Rd. (from Rt 1 to Pennsylvania/Delaware Line)
This is the most rural, undeveloped segment of the corridor with the narrowest roadway section. The
Chadds Ford Village Center creates a visual gateway to the Byway however this southern leg is not
highly visible travelling eastbound. The Creek Road offset intersection at Route 1 needs better signage
to facilitate the northbound travel on Creek Road to West Chester via Station Way Rd. We recommend
the posted speed of 40 mph on this segment be reduced to 25 mph on this segment north of the state line
for driver safety. This roadway section is too narrow for bus travel with tighter turns at the northern
portion. There is an opportunity to expand an existing pull off area for scenic views in the southbound
travel lane just north of Bullock Rd. We recommend additional signage to mark the pull-off area and the
bridge crossing. The existing bridge which crosses the Brandywine Creek at near midpoint of this
section is a narrow width and is too small for bus access as a two-way bridge.
Rt 1 (from Rt 52 to Lenape Rd)
This four lane arterial section has the benefit of the entrance to Longwood Gardens at the westernmost
point to create a visual change in the roadway with the existing bridge overpass. The intersection of
Route 52 and Route 1 to the corridor indicates scenic byway signage but further design is needed to
calm traffic and announce the gateway of these roadways. Landscape treatments such as raised planted
median and street trees at the edges of the R.O.W. would designate a special area. The current route 1
section traveling from Route 52 and the east to Route 100 is a higher speed corridor with Jersey barrier
unlike many Pennsylvania highway arterials. The intersection at Hamorton of 52 southbound to
Delaware is a section too large causing an encroachment of the existing homes which front Route 1.
This section could be narrowed and traffic speeds reduced to re-establish a setback of these historic
homes with buffer planting. A second alternative is to propose one-way pairs using the existing Route
roadway as the westbound lane and the existing Hamorton Cut-off as the eastbound lane.
Route 52 (from Pennsylvania/Delaware Line to Rt 1)
This segment of the corridor is one of the higher travelled in the Byway with over 11,000 cars a day and
is safe for bus travel with a wider cross section. It contains smaller commercial areas at Hamerton,
Mendenhall and Fairville. The Mendenhall area is the largest of these crossroads and warrants traffic
calming, sidewalks and bicycle lanes at the edges of the roadway to extend to nearby neighbourhoods.
Lenape Road (from Rt 1 to Creek Road)
This segment carries higher traffic at the southernmost end from Street Rd to Route 1. Travelling
northbound, the existing pull-off at the historical marker south of Webb Barn Lane needs improvement
and signage. Blind driveways occur on the southbound lane south of Williamsburg Drive, Unionville
Road and near Webb Barn Lane. Travelling southbound there is a scenic pull-off opportunity south of
Street Rd. In the northbound direction blind driveways occur south of Locust Grove Rd. and south of
Pocopson Road. There is a sight distance problem looking northbound for drivers turning from
Williamsburg Drive due to grade issues. At Deblyn V. Lane the roadway widens for intersection turn
lanes, this area could be calmed with planted medians for the turning movement. The intersection of
Lenape and Creek Road is too tight a turning radius for buses, not to mention the narrow width of the
bridge crossing the Brandywine Creek at the Picnic Park.
South Creek Road SR 842 (from Bradford Ave. to Strasburg Road)
This is relatively rural segment of the corridor with larger regional active parks and a passive greenway
trail on the northern leg. Travelling northbound there are blind intersections at the access of Shaw’s
Bridge Park, Hillsdale Road and across from the Stroud preserve. In the southbound direction there are
areas for existing scenic pull-off improvements at Centennial Drive and south of Bridge Road; and areas
of poor sight distance at the intersection of Centennial Drive and Birmingham Road.
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
Strasburg Road (from South Creek Road to Bradford Avenue)
This segment transitions from a rural area to a more urban section as you move into West Chester. East
of Ormead Lane the road section widens with large shoulders with Commercial uses on the both sides of
Bradford Avenue. There are blind driveways west of Highland Drive and no larger access issues.
North Bradford Avenue (from Strasburg Rd to Creek Road)
The northern portion of this segment is the most urban of the byway, carries almost 10,000 cars a day
and has commercial and residential uses directly fronting the street. This portion of the corridor is
predominately a closed section neighbourhood street with intermittent sidewalk frontage. Additional
sidewalks should be added for increased connectivity for the range of uses. Bike traffic can be shared
within the street travel lanes. There are two locations in the southern portion of this segment at
Shropshire Drive where the road section width increases and a median can reduce speed and improve
safety. The second location is at the intersection of Birmingham Road where a large shoulder can be
used for a dedicated southbound left turn lane.
Creek Road (from South Creek Road to Route 1)
This is a lower speed segment of the corridor with many blind driveway locations, as you travel through
the southern portion near Chadd’s Ford congestion increases with access to parking areas for
commercial and residential uses. Travelling southbound there are blind driveways near Country Club
Road, Continental Drive, north and south of Brinton’s Bridge Road continuing south to Master’s Way.
There is an opportunity for a southbound scenic pull-off just south of Street Rd and area for a new
southbound left turn at Master’s Way.
Birmingham Road (from South Creek Rd. to North Bradford Avenue)
This segment connects two of the legs of the corridor, carries a lower amount of traffic in the corridor
and provides redundancy for the street network for West Chester. There are two areas for blind
driveways in this segment, one being between Wind Song Rd. and south Connelltown Rd. and the
second between Meadowview Lane and Allegiance Drive on Birmingham Road.
Existing Conditions Questions:
282
1. Any other studies should we consult? Speed studies performed?
283
284
285
286
2. Has the Corridor conducted any origin and destinations studies? If not, outside of the
recreational and cultural features what are the preferred destination points within or adjacent to
the Corridor. This is to help identify primary tourism locations and routes to address the lack of
pull-offs and parking areas and make the corridor safer for buses and visitors.
287
3. Any project recommendations from Figure 1 that have been completed or should be removed?
288
289
4. Does the Commission favor de-designation of Route 100, reduction of speeds, and pedestrian
improvements to increase connectivity and reduce automobile trips and accidents?
290
291
5. Should the plan consider traffic-calming improvements to Route 52 to reduce speeds and
automobile accidents?
292
293
6. In order of safety and traffic flow does the Corridor take precedence over any other portion of
the network?
294
295
296
297
7. Where should there be improvements to infrastructure and connectivity for alternative modes of
transportation? Is there still a desire for expanded transit service, particularly along Route 52
linking West Chester and Kennett Square? Any official bicycle trails or pedestrian paths
designated?
298
299
300
8. TIP Status
H:\08\08-06412-001\CivMun\Existing Conditions Memo\Existing Conditions Memo.doc