The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP200800032 Legacy Document 2008-09-30 (2)Central Virginia Recycling Center Albemarle County, VA September 19, 2008 Traffic Report SP # 2008-00032 Submitted by: Terra Concepts, P.C. F For.- Central or:Central Virginia Recycling, Inc. Table of Contents I Introduction II Vicinity Map III Anticipated Traffic IV Conclusion Appendix Central Virginia Recycling SP -2008-00032 Certified Engineer's Report 2 3 4 I. Introduction The purpose of this Traffic Report is to satisfy the Albemarle County Engineering Department criteria based on Chapter 18, Section 4.14.8 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance and in the Albemarle Coup . Design Standards Manual -Engineering dated August 18, 2008 as it relates to the Central Virginia Recycling proposal. The proposal is to locate a wood recycling operation on Tax Map 45 Parcels 21N & 21N1 within the Rural Areas of Albemarle County. In order to allow this the County must grant a Special Use Permit. The information provided herein is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. Additional information may be requested by the County staff for incorporation into this report up until the Board of Supervisor's public hearing. Any data found to be inaccurate is the responsibility of the Central Virginia Recycling, Inc. and will be revised as necessary. Alan G. Franklin, P.E. Terra Concepts, P.C. 224 Court Square Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Central Virginia Recycling SP -2008-00032 Traffic Report 3..�JiO Alan G. Franklin Ur. No. 36326 9/19/08 II. Vicinity Map Below is the proposed site's location (highlighted) relative to its surrounding environment. Central Virginia Recycling SP -2008-00032 Traffic Report III. Anticipated Traffic The following information was provided by the Central Virginia Recycling, Inc. to VDOT, and again in our original submission through the County, earlier on in the project's evolution. Throughout the discussion with VDOT, they have identified the intersection of Route 250 and State Route 794 as being potentially awkward given our proposed entrance location. We developed an option for making this intersection safer and better accommodates our entrance. On the following sheet, is the information we provided VDOT to review our traffic impacts. This information accounts for employees, deliveries of both single -axle dump trucks and tractor trailers, and a small percentage of retail trips. All in all, there would be a total of 184 total trips per week expected. During their review, VDOT issued a comment response letter dated July 23, 2008, that determined only a right -turn lane was required based on the estimated truck traffic volumes provided. In addition, they also determined no left -turn lane was required based on the information provided. Located in the appendix, is the illustration depicting what our office recommended and has since been "tentatively" accepted by VDOT as being suitable for improving this intersection. Final construction documents of these improvements have yet to be prepared. These plans will be submitted for final review by VDOT during the Final Site Plan process of this project. Also within the Appendix you will find a copy of the memo issued by our office describing our estimated traffic volumes, the worksheet used by VDOT to access the left - turn warrants and their latest recommendations to the County. Central Virginia Recycling SP -2008-00032 Traffic Report IV. Conclusion In summary, based on our site inspections and analysis and the input by the local VDOT residency it appears traffic generated by this project is not a concern on Route 250.This concern appears lessened further by the improvements offered by the Applicant at the intersection of Route 250 and 794. It may be however, a concern to the surrounding neighbors due to the perception and Central Virginia Recycling SP -2008-00032 Traffic Report 4 Central Virginia Recycling Center Appendix Documents Included: 1. Memo from Terra Concepts regarding assumed traffic impacts 2. VDOT worksheet for left -turn warrants 3. Suggested Intersection Improvements at Route 250 and 794 4. VDOT comments Central Virginia Recycling SP -2008-00032 Traffic Report TERRA CONCEPTS, PC MEMORANDUM DATE: September 19, 2008 TO: VDOT & Albemarle County Dept. of Community Development- Engineering FROM: Steve Edwards, Sr. Landscape Architect, Terra Concepts, P.C. RE: Central Virginia Recycling Center SUP Submission; Traffic Information In preparation for this submittal the Applicant and our office consulted with VDOT to determine what our traffic impacts for TMP 94-2N & N1 might be on Route 250 (Richmond Road), the ITE manual and a traffic engineering consultant. We also have met with the local residency on site. In these discussions we have tried to hypothesize our traffic impacts. Unfortunately, there is not enough empirical data available to make solid assumptions even after researching other similar facilities in Virginia. Below are our assumptions. Customer vehicles is 5/day Deliveries of single -axle dump trunks Monday through Friday is 50/day Deliveries of tractor trailers Monday through Friday is 5/day Assumes there will be a maximum of 10 employees Therefore, we anticipate 140 trips per day. DHV (left turn volume) = ADT x K 140 x 0.08850 = 13 peak left turns per hour 13/325 = < 5% of advancing peak hour volume on Route 250 xc: Ken and Bobby Vess 0810 CIVIL ENGINEERING • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 224 Court Square . Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 • Office 434-295-4005 • Fax 434-295-2103 • www.terraconncel2tspc.com C-7 WARRANTS FOR LEFT -TURN STORAGE LANES ON TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS The warrants in Table C-1-2 are taken from the 2004 AASHTO "Green Book", Page 685, Exhibit 9-75. Source: 2004 AASHTO Green Book, Page 685, Exhibit 9-75 * DESIGN SPEED IS THE PREFERRED CRITERIA, BUT OPERATING SPEED OR* SPEED LIMIT MAY BE USED IF APPLICABLE, I.E. ADDING LANES TO EXISTING FACILITIES. TABLE C-1-2 WARRANTS FOR LEFT - TURN LANES ON TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS * Rev. 7/08 / OPPOSING VOLUME (VPH) ADVANCING -E=T-TURN VOLUME (VPH) VO_UVE (VPH) Example: Two-lane highway with 40 -MPH operating speed Opposing Volume (VPH) - 600 Advancing Volume (VPH) - 440 Left -Turn Volume (VPH) - 44 or 10% of Advancing Volume With opposing volume (VPH) of 600 and 10% of advancing volume (VPH) making left turns, and advancing volume (VPH) of 305 or more will warrant a left -turn lane. Figure C-1-1.3 denotes that a 100' storage length is required. ADVANCING VOLUME VPH 5% 10% 20% 30% OPPOSING VOLUME LEFT TURNS LEFT TURNS LEFT TURNS LEFT TURNS 40 -MPH OPERATING SPEED/DESIGN SPEED 800 330 240 180 160 600 410 305 225 200 400 510 380 275 245 200 640 470 350 305 100 1 720 515 390 340 50 -MPH OPERATING SPEED/DESIGN SPEED 800 280 210 165 135 600 350 280 195 170 400 430 320 240 210 200 550 400 300 270 100 615 445 335 295 60 -MPH OPERATING SPEED/DESIGN SPEED 800 230 170 125 115 600 290 210 160 140 400 365 270 200 175 200 450 330 250 215 100 505 370 275 240 Source: 2004 AASHTO Green Book, Page 685, Exhibit 9-75 * DESIGN SPEED IS THE PREFERRED CRITERIA, BUT OPERATING SPEED OR* SPEED LIMIT MAY BE USED IF APPLICABLE, I.E. ADDING LANES TO EXISTING FACILITIES. TABLE C-1-2 WARRANTS FOR LEFT - TURN LANES ON TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS * Rev. 7/08 / OPPOSING VOLUME (VPH) ADVANCING -E=T-TURN VOLUME (VPH) VO_UVE (VPH) Example: Two-lane highway with 40 -MPH operating speed Opposing Volume (VPH) - 600 Advancing Volume (VPH) - 440 Left -Turn Volume (VPH) - 44 or 10% of Advancing Volume With opposing volume (VPH) of 600 and 10% of advancing volume (VPH) making left turns, and advancing volume (VPH) of 305 or more will warrant a left -turn lane. Figure C-1-1.3 denotes that a 100' storage length is required. T� I 1' Ao II f I I I COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY OFFICE 701 VDOT WAY CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911 DAVID S. EKERN, P.E. COMMISSIONER • The existing gravel area needs to be designed to have a well defined commercial entrance that meets the current standards. Sight distances also need to be shown at the entrance location. . • The setback for parking needs to be outside of the clear zone area for route 61.6 and it should also be outside of any sight lines needed for the entrance. SP -2008-030 Hall's Auto Body Tier 111 PWSF Amendment (Gerald Gatobu) • No Comments. Old Dominion Equine Barn and Ridine Rine Amendment (Scott Clark) • The final site plan needs to show adequate sight lines and details for the proposed entrance. SP -2008-032 Central Vireinia Recycling Center (Joan McDowell) • The applicant has previously contacted VDOT with estimated traffic numbers and it was determined that a right tum lane off Route 250 is necessary but there is not a need for a left turn lane. • The proposed entrance to the facility is too close to the existing intersection at Route 749. There was a proposal from the applicant to VDOT to relocate Route 749 to reduce the amount of skew at the intersection of Route 749 and Route 250, connect the recycling entrance to Route 749 and add a right turn lane on Route 250. This proposal is the design that should be pursued to reduce conflict points on Route 250. ZMA-2008-003 Albemarle Place (Judith Albemarle Place (Judith Wieland) • The change in the phasing of the internal roads does not appear to have any impact on the surrounding roads. If you have any questions, please let me know O'Z el DeNu to, P Staff Engineer VDOT Charlottesville Residency WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING