Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
WPO202100017 Correspondence 2022-02-07 (2)
i TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. To: Adam Moore, PE (VDOT) From: Steve Schmidt, PE, PTOE RE: Ivy Proper Design Waiver and Access Management Exception Request Date: August 626, 2021 Copy: Clint Shifflet, PE (TG) 1001 Boulders Parkway P 804.200.6500 Suite 300 F 804.560.1016 Richmond, VA 23225 www.timmons.com �tiF PLTH pF 1 F 8/26/21 0 U STEPNEN O. SC11h41 Lk. No. 049985 Timmons Group has prepared a VDOT Design Waiver (LD-448) and Access Management Exception Request (AM-E) in support of the proposed Ivy Proper development located in Albemarle County, Virginia. The proposed 6,500 square foot office building is located along the north side of US Route 250 (Ivy Road), east of Ivy Depot Road, and will be served by a single, shared full -access entrance off of US Route 250. Figures 1 and 2 show the site location and proposed site layout (all figures can be found at the end of this report). The site is located adjacent to an existing 2,200 square foot office building with one (1) full access entrance on US Route 250. With the proposed development, the existing access point to the adjacent office building will be closed and the shared access shifted slightly to the west to serve both buildings/parcels. Pursuant to VDOT comments, a turn lane warrant analysis (TLWA) was completed and submitted to VDOT on June 18, 2021. The TLWA indicated an eastbound left turn lane was warranted based on Figure 3-5 from Appendix F of VDOT's Road Design Manual (RDM). The analysis also indicated a left turn lane was not needed from a safety, capacity, or queuing standpoint. The TLWA is included as Attachment A for reference. As a result of the that analysis, VDOT has requested a Design Waiver Request (LD-448) to support not constructing the eastbound left turn lane. In addition, an Access Management Exception (AM-E) Request is required as the proposed entrance spacing does not meet current VDOT standards relative to the existing gas station entrance to the east. This memorandum is in support of both the LD-448 and the AM-E and is organized into separate sections accordingly. CIVIL ENGINEERING I ENVIRONMENTAL I SURVEYING I CIS I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Ivy Proper Design Waiver and Access Management Exception Request August 26, 2021 Page 2 of 5 Design Waiver As discussed above, the Applicant is requesting a Design Waiver to eliminate the construction of an eastbound left turn lane at the site entrance on US Route 250 (Ivy Road). VDOT Form LD-448 is included in Attachment B. This Design Waiver Request Memo addresses the following criteria: • Established design criteria versus proposed and existing criteria (including traffic data, design speed and posted speed); • Reason(s) the appropriate design criteria cannot be met; • Justification for the proposed criteria; • Any background information which documents, supports or justifies the request; • Any mitigation that will be provided to further support orjustify the request; • Cost to meet standard versus project cost; and • Crash History over the past 3 years. Established Design Criteria versus Proposed Criteria US Route 250 (Ivy Road) is a VDOT-maintained, two-lane, undivided, urban minor arterial roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. According to the 2019 VDOT Count Book (most recent available), US Route 250 carries approximately 13,000 vehicles per day in the vicinity of the site. Additional information about existing and projected traffic volumes are included in the TLWA in Attachment A. In accordance with Figure 3-1 of the RDM Appendix F, a roadway with the characteristics of US Route 250 requires a left turn lane with a 100-foot taper and a minimum 100 feet of storage with any additional storage determined by capacity analysis. As shown in the TLWA, capacity analysis indicates a 95"' percentile queue of zero feet. Therefore, the established design criteria for the eastbound left turn lane is 100 feet by 100 feet. Additionally, according to Figure 3-22 of Appendix F, the approach taper and departure taper requirement is 245 feet. The proposed design criteria is to eliminate the construction of the eastbound left -turn lane. Ivy Proper Design Waiver and Access Management Exception Request August 26, 2021 Page 3 of 5 Reason the Appropriate Design Criteria Cannot be Met As shown on the attached layout plan, an eastbound left turn lane with the established design criteria cannot be constructed for the following reasons: 1. Immediately west of the site, there is an overhead railroad track that is part of the Buckingham Branch of CSX. The location of the crossing bridge limits the geometry available for a left turn lane into the site. The abutments for the existing railroad bridge preclude widening of the roadway at that point. As shown on the attached layout plan, the approach taper requires realignment and reconstruction of the railroad bridge. Further, the approach taper requires obtaining right- of-way from the railroad. 2. The left turn lane taper and storage will occur within the functional area of the Us Route 250/Ivy Depot Road intersection (Figure 4-2A of Appendix F). Justification for the Proposed Design Criteria As shown in the TLWA, the eastbound left turn lane is not required from a capacity or queueing standpoint. The eastbound shared left -through approach will operate at a level of service A with a 95' percentile queue of zero feet. The maximum number of left turns is anticipated to be six (6) in the AM peak hour; this equates to one (1) left turn every 10 minutes during the peak hour. Further, the proposed design criteria (no eastbound left turn lane) will not impact the existing railroad bridge or the influence area of the US Route 250/Ivy Depot Road intersection. It should also be noted that auxiliary turn lanes are not provided for adjacent commercial uses which generate higher traffic volumes. Background Information which Documents, Supports or Justifies the Request The TLWA is included in Attachment A and offers documentation and support for the design waiver request. Mitigation that will be Provided to Further Support or Justify the Request The proposed project will consolidate two (2) existing entrances on US Route 250 into one (1) shared entrance. This will reduce the number of potential conflict points along the roadway. It is noted that all analyses assume traffic for both the existing and proposed use consolidated into the shared entrance. Cost to meet standard versus project cost As discussed above, construction of a standard eastbound left turn lane will impact the railroad bridge abutment to the west. The bridge structure would need to be realigned/reconstructed in order to accommodate the approach taper. The estimated cost of replacing the bridge is $1,250,000 and the estimated construction cost of the eastbound left -turn lane is $500,000; this results in a total estimated cost of $1,750,000 to meet standards. This estimate is independent of any right-of-way costs that will be necessary. Ivy Proper Design Waiver and Access Management Exception Request August 26, 2021 Page 4 of 5 The estimated construction cost of the proposed development (including access, parking, and the building) is $2,050,000. Therefore, the cost to meet the standard is 85% of the total project cost. Crash History over the past three (3) years A review of the publicly available VDOT crash data indicates that in the past three (3) years (2018-2020) there have been five (5) crashes in the vicinity of the proposed site entrance along US Route 250. The crash severity was classified as: • Three (3) property damage only crashes; • One (1) crash resulted in visible injury; and • One (1) crash resulted in nonvisible injury. The type crashes were classified as: • Two (2) Angle Crashes; • One (1) Sideswipe -Same Direction Crash; • One (1) Rear -End Crash; and • One (1) Fixed Object -In Road Crash. Two (2) of the five (5) crashes involved vehicles traveling eastbound (one angle and one rear -end). A map of the crash locations can be found in Attachment C. The crash history does not indicate an existing crash pattern in the eastbound direction. Summary of Design Waiver As indicated in the TLWA, an eastbound left -turn lane is not needed from a capacity or queuing standpoint. As discussed above, there is justification for not constructing the left -turn lane from an operational standpoint, the cost to construct a standard left -turn lane is 85% of the overall cost of the project, and the crash history does not indicate an existing crash pattern in the eastbound direction. Access Management Exception (AM-E) According to Table 2-2 of Appendix F, the required spacing for a Type 3 (Full Access) entrance on roads with a posted speed of 35 mph is 470 feet. The proposed shared access location is approximately 160 feet from the existing gas station entrance to the east on US Route 250. The results in a reduction of 310 feet from the standard. The resulting Access Management Exception (AM-E) Request is included in Attachment D. As noted above, the proposed entrance will consolidate the entrance to the adjacent property to the east (office building) and result in one, shared full access entrance. The consolidated entrance will increase the spacing from the parcel to the east (gas station) over existing conditions (from 110 feet to 160 feet) while maintaining access to both developments. Ivy Proper Design Waiver and Access Management Exception Request August 26, 2021 Page 5 of 5 The analysis in the TLWA indicates the proposed shared entrance location will not impact the entrance to the east (gas station) of the site. All site traffic will travel past the gas station and make a right turn into the site. There will be no queue in the westbound direction. The shared site access point cannot be relocated to the west (to increase the spacing) and still maintain access for the adjacent development. Access for both commercial properties along the southern side of US Route 250 (opposite the proposed entrance) is undefined; no raised curbs or driveways are delineated and vehicles enter/exit from multiple locations. To summarize, the proposed shared entrance location will consolidate two (2) entrances into one (1), provide shared access between two developments, increase the spacing from the entrance (gas station) to the east, and will not impact the existing gas station entrance. L I FIZA QI lz1" ;.,��.,•?y -yam �%4 �,. OWN, AA IL w n..a j '.,..r.. J qZq i I Z 1 to Z °z L i o ..•6•.� Site Layout Figure 9 ure I Pro per TIMMONS GROUP 2 YOUR VIS1ON ACHIA°AD THROUGH OUR$. Albemarle County, Virginia LEGEND: Eil CONCRETE SIDEWALK El HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT LIGHT DUTY ASPHALT 0 op Mo E n a ASPHALT TO BE MILLED & OVERLAID U N � N > E PEA GRAVEL WALK W v E 0 0 Q LL o 3 O O LL O W O t0 o Q j V OMO Z 00 — ui O U71 (A '"'oIn HH � (A N CL Z Z Bw LU ° ° o'i 0 x N 00° oR ?LL 00 00 O U) = C N z r 000 Fv auui U) Z) Z) 0 c m — 00 0 N^ w 0 V V 0vM a p d v 0 o w 0 0 24"HOPE 0 /NV=537.13 I I 0 °p ° BUCMBRANCH RAILROAD APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF 0 °o 00 U70 0 ° I KIGRAPRIMARY DRAIN FIELD p 00 K p EXTENTS OF p O° 500-YEAR p O O O FLCH p ° _ ° 0 0 6 0 RAILROAD CH 0 0 0. o °°LD o° p I I �0 "I H R APPROXIMATE LOCATION ° O 00 0 ° 2q O OF RESERVE DRAIN FIELD 0 ° p o CONCRETE BLOCK Q O 535 8 i RETAINING WALLS C] (3) BOLLARDS w O- N BRIDGEABUTMENT ° o o p I MAX.HEIGHT o6' o o 0 O o o 0 0 0 O w ' .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O o 0 0 3, IMP 58A2-21 .W. F 00 S Q SR&OR LCC U i `~ LAB, 1597, PG. 226 Q N N CONCRETE BLOCK D.B. 231, PG.585 z N N BRIDGE ABUTMENT PROVIDE SAFETY O RAILING WHERE WALLS D.B. 130, PG. RETAINING WALL ZONING' Cl COMMERCIAL U) DATE MAX. HEIGHT = 2.5' OH 0, a EXCEED 30" HIGH PRESENT USE: SERVICE j PROPOSED UTILITY POLE h .8 OF SEPTIC LOCATION REPAIR GARAGE K 12-30-2020 O� 81 OF SEPTIC TANK �_ .. O DRAWN BY BLOCK OH r RZ DUMPSTER F BRI ENT / L PADAND ENCLOSURE A. FONTAINE s DESIGNED BY 13'-2"BRIDE_ �A HEIGHT S/O". , 1 g, �. 16' APPROXIMATE \- / PROX. LOCATION OF GarA LOCATION OF j COT€ >\{ S ARV PUMP STATION • C. SHIFFLETT HI v ION =. - PROPOSED WELL ',r g� WHEELSTOP,' // \ 1© • PROPOSED EDGE �J §� NP.\ CHECKED BY OFPAVEMENT 24' \ p \'\, _ • C. SHIFFLETT PROPOSED BUILDING L' FFE = 522.50 CG-12 \, •'gyp • HEIGHT: 26'-6" \ RV ` • • SCALE a A HANDICAP \ R3' % IRS• 1" = 20' o PARKING SIGN (NP.) F 162.5' i f , R3' R8 TIE TO EXISTING PAVEMENT • j r RV • • B' / RT 6 "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" SIGN . 41.5' "NO PARKING RS'FIRE LANE" SIGN ' vpo 3 0 SHARED ACCESS AND PARKING AGREEMENT p O O p o lF R� Q Q 0 SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR O ° ° ° o p ° �yi 'PpG4p _ 6� / TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL. O orb Tb` ':� i% TMP 58A2-20A o ° 0 Ro,�so /� ,� 5 GUYS WITHOUT FRIES p p \. x� TOO LLC O ° 13.8' ® / \ US. g877 PG.218992 PG 6 0 o p srcp SI 0 CONSTRUCTION O E LANDSCAPE ZONING.' CY COMMERCIAL 0 0 0 EASEMENT ° \ SST USE. OFFICE BLDG. 0 O F'q,9 0Ry Z 7,0, O p SDP 5 'L/F ° ° D� )oN Q 00 0 00Q GF O 0 p J 0 o C� �- VCURB ANSI p 0 0 o O ,� TRANSITION O 0 o s \ o ° ° CONTINUOUS 0 0 O Lu 0 ° ASPHALT SD INLET/W GRATE ° L O ° 0 ENTRANCE ) TOP=515 15 0 0 1 Q O 1 INV. 1N=513.45'4"PVC ° 0 ° 0 I, T "CONNECTION UNKNOWN 0° / /'� Z p 0-APPROX EDGE OF Iit INV. OUT=51 L60'24"CMP 0 ° \J � 7 O O PAVEMENT I 0 O L I 0 J O .0 ° 0 0 > p O / O O 000 0 00 0 ° a\ 0 0 .0 fON \\ ° LL O 0 S/j ENT, 01\ ° U // ' °a °0 o 000 0 .o EAR oO ° p LLJ / CC 0 0 0 ° / LITTLE IVY 0 0 0 0 p° v� CREEK o' NOTE: "' Z ° p ° o o ° ° p ° KNOX BOX LOCATION TO BE COORDINATED m o ° o 0° o WITH FIRE MARSHALL'S OFFICE J J p .o ° 24"CMP W/BROKEN 0 O Q 0 ° 0 O 0 HEADWALL 0 0 0 .° ° INV. 511.07' 7 0 O 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 p o 0 0 0 o°°° 0 0 0 o p 0 GUARDRAIL o 0 I..1� O O ° 0.0 ° ° O CONC. RET. 0 ~� p WALL 0 0 0 O O 0 p / 0 O 0 p O O 0 O p 0 p O O O' 0° 0 O ° ° S 00 O 0 ° 0 Q p 0 ° O Q O ° p 0° p Z p 0 O O O p ° O O O ° O O 0 0 ° 0 0 p°0° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p°° °000 SCALE V=30' JOB NO. 0 30' 1 42932 SHEET NO. C4.0 L ATTACHMENT A 6/18/21 Turn Lane Warrant Analysis 00 TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. To: Adam Moore, PE (VDOT) From: Steve Schmidt, PE, PTOE RE: Ivy Proper —Turn Lane Warrant Analysis Date: June 18, 2021 Copy: Clint Shifflett, PE (TG) 1001 Boulders Parkway P 804.200.6500 Suite 300 F 804.560.1016 Richmond, VA 23225 www.timmorts.com 6-18-21 EPHEN O. scHmn Lic. No. 049985 ).-, _�% Timmons Group has performed a turn lane warrant and queuing analysis in support of the proposed Ivy Proper development in Albemarle County, Virginia. The proposed 6,500 square foot office building is located along the north side of US Route 250 (Ivy Road) to the east of Ivy Depot Road and will be served by a single, shared access point off of US Route 250. Figures 1 and 2 show the site location and proposed site layout (all figures can be found at the end of this report). The site is located adjacent to an existing 2,200 square foot office building with one access point on US Route 250. With the development, the existing access point will be relocated slightly to the west and a single, shared access point will serve both uses. There will not be an increase in the number of access points along US Route 250. Based on comments received from VDOT on January 21, 2021, a turn lane warrant analysis was requested at the shared site entrance. This analysis evaluates the need for turn lanes and, if warranted, the storage length required at the study intersections. Background Information US Route 250 (Ivy Road) is a VDOT maintained two-lane, undivided, minor arterial roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. According to the 2019 VDOT Count Book (most recent available), US Route 250 carries approximately 13,000 vehicles per day in the vicinity of the site. A copy of the VDOT Count Book data is included in Appendix A. Traffic Volume Analysis Existing Traffic Volumes VDOT Central Office provided hourly traffic volumes along this section of US Route 250 which were collected in 2018 (pre -pandemic) and 2021 (during the pandemic). The raw traffic data is included in Appendix B. The 2018 counts collected 24-hour, bi-directional volume over the course of 3 weekdays when public schools were in session. The counts were averaged and indicate that the AM peak hour occurs from 8:00- 9:00 AM and the PM peak hour occurs from 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM. During the AM peak hour, on average, 697 (62%) vehicles travel eastbound on US Route 250 and 421 (38%) vehicles travel westbound. .... Ivy Proper —Turn Lane Warrant Analysis t 00 June 2 ff Page o15 TIMMONS GROUP I,1 111.ou—.. , During the PM peak hour, on average, 367 (30%) vehicles travel eastbound on US Route 250 and 875 (70%) vehicles travel westbound. The 2021 counts were collected during the pandemic were between 5% and 15% lower when compared to the 2018 data. These volumes were therefore discarded from the analysis as not representative of "normal" traffic conditions. 2021 Traffic Volumes In order to develop 2021 traffic volumes, a 2% annual traffic growth rate (compounded annually) was applied to the 2018 traffic counts. The resulting 2021 traffic volumes indicate 770 vehicles travel eastbound on US Route 250 and 465 vehicles travel westbound during the AM peak hour. During the PM peak hour, 405 vehicles travel eastbound on US Route 250 and 966 vehicles travel westbound. Site Trip Generation and Distribution The trips generated by existing office and the proposed development were estimated using the 10th edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual and calculated using the size of the building (square feet) as the independent variable. As shown in Table 1, the existing office and the proposed development will generate a total of 11 AM peak hour trips (10 in and 1 out), 10 PM peak hour trips (1 in and 9 out), and 84 average weekday daily trips at the shared site entrance. Table 1: Site Trip Generation Buildout Weekda it Land Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Average Land Use Size Units Code In Oul Total In Out Total Daily Tdps Existing Development Office 2,200 S.F. 710 3 0 3 0 3 3 21 Proposed Development Office 6,500 S.F. 710 7 1 8 1 6 7 63 Total Trips at Entrance 10 1 11 1 8 10 84 Note: (1) Based on the MUtute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 10th Edition. Assumes General UrbarlSububan land use category. As noted above, access to the site will be provided vial shared access point off of US Route 250. It was assumed traffic to/from the site will follow the same distribution as the existing traffic along US Route 250 (62% to/from the west in the AM and 70% to/from the east in the PM). .... Ivy Proper —Turn Lane Warrant Analysis t 00 June 18, 1 3of5 TIMMONS GROUP Page 3 of 5 This results in 6 eastbound left turns and 4 westbound right -turns in the AM peak hour and 0 eastbound left turns and 1 westbound right -turn in the PM peak hour. It is noted that with 6 left turns in the peak hour, this is an average of 1 left turn vehicle every 10 minutes. Turn Lane Warrant Analysis The 2021 traffic volumes were combined with the site generated traffic to develop the traffic volumes used in the turn lane warrant and operational analysis. The turn lane warrant analysis was then completed using Figure 3-26 (right turn) and Figure (3-5) from Appendix F of the VDOT Road Design Manual. Figure 3 shows the right -turn lane warrant analysis and indicates a westbound right -turn lane and taper is not warranted at the shared site entrance. Figure 4 shows the left -turn lane warrant analysis and indicates an eastbound left -turn lane with 100' of storage is warranted at the shared site entrance. It is noted that the left -turn lane warrant analysis is based on the amount (percent) of left turns relative to the total advancing traffic in that direction. The lowest available chart provided by VDOT is for 5% lefts and Appendix F offers no guidance for percentages less than 5%. In this case, the 6 left turns in the AM peak hour represent 0.7% of the advancing traffic. The VDOT provided chart is based on left turn volumes 10 times the traffic generated by the proposed development and is not necessarily applicable for these circumstances. Operational and Queuing Analysis Per VDOT traffic engineering policy, the projected 2021 total peak hour volumes were analyzed using appropriate TOSAM methodology to determine the operational effectiveness of the existing intersection geometry and the impacts of the proposed new site traffic. The operational and queuing analyses were performed using SYNCHRO Version 10 and HCM 6tn Edition methodologies. The corresponding SYNCHRO worksheets are included in Appendix C. Table 2 summarizes the future 2021 intersection LOS, delay and 95' percentile queue lengths based on the volumes discussed above and a single lane approach in each direction (i.e. no turn lanes). As shown in Table 2, the shared eastbound thru-left lane operates at LOS A during each peak hour with 8.6 seconds/vehicle delay in the AM peak hour. The westbound thru-right lane is unopposed and therefore experiences no delay. The southbound approach (exiting the site) operates at LOS D in both peak hours with no concerns of excess delay or queuing. As shown in Table 2, with a shared thru-left lane, the eastbound approach has a 951" percentile queue of zero feet. This indicates that 95% of the time, there will be no queue in the shared thru-left lane. The nearest entrance or intersection to the west (Ivy Depot Road) is located approximately 150 feet from the shared site entrance. The 951h percentile queues will not interfere with the adjacent upstream intersection. Ivy Proper —Turn Lane Warrant Analysis June 18, 2021 Page 4 of 5 A left -turn lane is not needed on operational or queuing grounds. ' • % TIMMONS GROUP Table 1: Intersection Level of Service, Delay, and Queue Summary Future 2021 Conditions Intersection and Type of Control Movement and Approach AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Delay (sec/veh) LOS HCM 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) Delay (sec/veh) LOS HCM 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) 1. US Route 250 (E-W) at Site Entrance (N) Unsignalized EBThru-Left 8.6 A 0 0.0 A 0 EBApproach 0.0 A 0.0 A WBThru-Right t t 0 t t 0 WBApproach t j t -- t t SS Left -Right 1 31.3 1 D 0 32.8 D 5 EBApproach 31.3 1 D -- 32.8 D t SYNCHRO does not provide level of service or delay for unsignalized movements with no conflicting volumes. Ivy Proper —Turn Lane Warrant Analysis June 18, 2021 Page 5 of 5 Conclusions TIMMONS GROUP A turn lane warrant and queuing analysis was prepared in support of the proposed Ivy Proper development in Albemarle County, Virginia. The site is located adjacent to an existing 2,200 square foot office building with one access point on US Route 250. With the development, the existing access point will be relocated slightly to the west and a single, shared access point will serve both uses. There will not be an increase in the number of access points along US Route 250. A westbound right -turn lane is not warranted at the shared site entrance on US Route 250. While the warrants indicate an eastbound left -turn lane is warranted at the shared site entrance on US Route 250, the installation of the improvement is not recommended for the following reasons: 1. Low Left Turn Volume — As noted above, traffic making a left turn into the site will make a maximum of 6 left turns in any hour. This equates to 1 left turn every 10 minutes on average. A turn lane is not needed for 1 vehicle every 10 minutes. 2. Inapplicable Turn Lane Warrant Chart — As noted above, the VDOT turn lane warrant charts are based off the percent of left turns with the lowest available chart for 5% lefts. In this case, the left turn volume is 0.7%; the VDOT chart is based on left turn volumes 10 times greater than the site traffic and is not necessarily applicable to these circumstances. 3. No Operational Benefit —As noted above, all mainline movements (left, through, and right) on US Route 250 operate at LOS A with minimal queueing without an eastbound left -turn lane. The 9511 percentile queue is zero feet. This indicates that 95% of the time, there will be no queue in the shared thru-left lane. 4. No Queuing Impacts —The projected queue generated by the proposed development is minimal and will not interfere with operations at the nearest adjacent intersection (Ivy Depot Road). 5. Existing Corridor — A review of the existing US Route 250 corridor finds that there no left -turn lanes at commercial entrance or intersections for approximately I X miles to the west of the site (until Tilman Road). This includes intersections with streets (Ivy Depot Road, Owensville Road, and Morgantown Road) which carry far more traffic than the shared site entrance. The current driver expectation approaching from the west on the corridor is to operate with no left -turn lanes. In conclusion, based on the operational and queuing analysis, there are no geometric improvements recommended for the shared site entrance on US Route 250. L I FIZA QI lz1" ;.,��.,•?y -yam �%4 WEIDA VZA R ® IA E� HII AA6 fill 5p ll i d� 9 _ N f n..a j '....•.. � J qZq Z i I 1 \� cL s ARRIN ..•6•.� Site Layout Figure 9 ure I Pro per TIMMONS GROUP 2 YOUR VIS1ON ACHIA°AD THROUGH OUR$. Albemarle County, Virginia GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT TURN TREATMENT (2-LANE HIGHWAY) FIGURE 3-26 VDOT ROAD DESIGN MANUAL APPENDIX F 120 100 FULL -WIDTH TURN LANE AND TAPER REQUIRED O Cr a 80 Ui S I W _::: tq 60 TAPER REQUIRED F� (0 40 d..................... PO 'NO TURN LANES OR TAPERS REQUIRED 4 -I 100 200 300 400 419 50) 600 700: LEGEND 9fi7 f AM Peak Hour PHV APPROACH TOTAL, VEHICLES PER HOUR — t - PM Peak Hour Results: Westbound Right Turn Lane or Taper Not Warranted Right -Turn Lane Guideline • •' `� Figure a '• US Route 250/Site Entrance Westbound Right g TIMMONS GROUP Existing + Growth + Site Traffic Volumes 3 Albemarle County, Virginia OMEN ONE ■■■■■\1■■■■■■■■ONE ■■■ , - ■■■■■■■■■■■■M■■■■■■■■MEN ■■■ NONE MEN ■■■■■■\1■■■■■■■■■■SEE S = Storage Length Required NONE MEN ■■■■■■■\■■■■■■ MEN OEM rSpeed) OMEN ■■■■■■■■■■1\■■■■MESON SEE EMMONS ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■\1 ■■■■■■■i�■ ■■■■■■ APPENDIX A VDOT Count Book Virqinia Department of Transportation Traffic Enqineerinq Division 2019 Annual Average Daily Traffic Volume Estimates By Section of Route Albemarle Maintenance Area - -------------Truck--------------- K Dir Route Jurisdiction Length AADT OA 4Tire Bus 2Axle 3+Axle 1Trail 2Trail QC QK AAWDT qW Factor Factor West 164 West 64 Ramp Albemarle County 0.22 540 G 99 % 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% F 0.113 F 530 G 02-616 Black Cat Rd , 151 Critzers Shop Rd Albemarle County (Maint: 62) 1.11 9800 G 93 % 1% 1% 1% 5% 0% F 0.088 F 0.613 9000 G Q0 US 250 Rockfish Gap Rd SR 22 Louisa Rd P31 Gordonsville Rd Albemarle County 8.11 6200 G 96 % 1% 1% 0% 2 % 0% C 0.098 F 0.678 6000 G Louisa County Line US 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk 240 Crozet Ave Albemarle County 1.43 7900 G 97% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% C 0.097 F 0.556 8500 G 02-810; Three Notchd Rd 02-810 Crozet Ave P40 Three Notchd Rd Albemarle County 2.40 6000 G 97% 1% 1% 1 % 1 % 0% F 0.097 F 0.556 6400 G "` 02 802 Old Th. Notchd Rd 240 Three Notchd Rd Albemarle County 0.68 7100 G 97% 1% 1% 1 % 1 % 0% C 0.104 F 0.684 7000 G US 250 Ivy Rd Augusta Counay Line 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Nelson County (Maint: 02) 1.27 11000 N 93 % 1 % 1% 2 % 4% 0% N 0.103 F 0.617 11000 N SR 6 Afton Mountain Rd 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Nelson County (Maint: 02) 0.13 8200 G 93 % 1 % 1 % 1 % 4% 0% C 0.136 F 0.715 8000 G '" Albemarle Co Line 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Albemarle County 0.32 8200 N 93 % 1 % 1% 1 % 4% 0% N 0.136 F 0.715 8000 N FR-172 Little Rock Lane 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Nelson County (Maint: 02) 1.45 8200 N 93 % 1% 1 % 1 % 4% 0% N 0.136 F 0.715 8000 N - SR 151 Critzers Shop Rd 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Nelson County (Maint: 02) 4.00 7900 G 97% 0% 1 % 1 % 1 % 0% C 0.143 F 0.808 7700 G FR-852 Bluebird Lane 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Albemarle County 0.56 9400 G 97% 1% 1 % 0% 1 % 0% C 0.139 F 0.793 8700 G " 1b4 Neu Yars,cy Mills 250 Rockfish Gap Trnpk Albemarle County 1.69 14000 G 98 % 1% 1 % 0% 0% 0% F 0.096 F 0.52 13000 G SR 240 Crozet Ave; 02635 Miller School Rd 5p�Rockfish Gap Trnpk Albemarle County 2.97 9800 G 98% 1% i% 0% 0% 0% F 0.096 F 0.603 10000 G 250 Ivy Rd Albemarle County 3.29 13000 ^ G 98 % 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% C 0.107 F 0.694 13000 G 250 Ivy Rd Albemarle County 3.84 13000 G 98 % 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% F 0.097 F 0.689 14000 G `" US 29Bus US 250 Icy Rd ED250 29 Monacan Trail Rd Albemarle County 1.98 58000 G 97% 0% 1 % 1 % 2% 0% F 0.097 F 0.542 61000 G a 11 wCL Charlottesville 4/16/2020 15 APPENDIX B VDOT Provided Data VDOT Provided Traffic Data LinklD Lane Direction StartDate Interval AxleCount VehicleCount '070130' 2 3/20/2018 0:00 60 0 11 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 0:00 60 0 19 1070130, 2 3/20/20181:00 60 0 6 1070130, 4 3/20/20181:00 60 0 8 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 2:00 60 0 5 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 2:00 60 0 7 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 3:00 60 0 10 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 3:00 60 0 8 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 4:00 60 0 29 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 4:00 60 0 5 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 5:00 60 0 93 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 5:00 60 0 11 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 6:00 60 0 276 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 6:00 60 0 68 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 7:00 60 0 705 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 7:00 60 0 244 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 8:00 60 0 693 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 8:00 60 0 401 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 9:00 60 0 437 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 9:00 60 0 257 1070130, 2 3/20/201810:00 60 0 304 1070130, 4 3/20/201810:00 60 0 260 1070130, 2 3/20/201811:00 60 0 283 1070130, 4 3/20/201811:00 60 0 310 1070130, 2 3/20/201812:00 60 0 304 1070130, 4 3/20/201812:00 60 0 330 1070130, 2 3/20/201813:00 60 0 286 1070130, 4 3/20/201813:00 60 0 315 1070130, 2 3/20/201814:00 60 0 315 1070130, 4 3/20/201814:00 60 0 391 1070130, 2 3/20/201815:00 60 0 271 1070130, 4 3/20/201815:00 60 0 464 1070130, 2 3/20/201816:00 60 0 371 1070130, 4 3/20/201816:00 60 0 646 1070130, 2 3/20/201817:00 60 0 319 1070130, 4 3/20/201817:00 60 0 832 1070130, 2 3/20/201818:00 60 0 301 1070130, 4 3/20/201818:00 60 0 479 1070130, 2 3/20/201819:00 60 0 139 1070130, 4 3/20/201819:00 60 0 291 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 20:00 60 0 112 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 20:00 60 0 195 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 21:00 60 0 78 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 21:00 60 0 145 1070130, 2 3/20/2018 22:00 60 0 47 1070130, 4 3/20/2018 22:00 60 0 69 '070130' 2 3/20/2018 23:00 60 0 20 '070130' 4 3/20/2018 23:00 60 0 44 ADT 11214 AM (8-9) 1094 PM (5-6) 1151 VDOT Provided Traffic Data '070130' 2 4/10/2018 0:00 60 0 8 '070130' 4 4/10/20180:00 60 0 20 '070130' 2 4/10/20181:00 60 0 6 '070130' 4 4/10/20181:00 60 0 9 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 2:00 60 0 2 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 2:00 60 0 1 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 3:00 60 0 8 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 3:00 60 0 5 '070130' 2 4/10/20184:00 60 0 26 '070130' 4 4/10/20184:00 60 0 5 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 5:00 60 0 105 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 5:00 60 0 14 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 6:00 60 0 318 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 6:00 60 0 90 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 7:00 60 0 765 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 7:00 60 0 288 '070130' 2 4/10/20188:00 60 0 694 '070130' 4 4/10/20188:00 60 0 436 '070130' 2 4/10/20189:00 60 0 457 '070130' 4 4/10/20189:00 60 0 264 '070130' 2 4/10/201810:00 60 0 365 '070130' 4 4/10/201810:00 60 0 277 '070130' 2 4/10/201811:00 60 0 345 '070130' 4 4/10/201811:00 60 0 302 '070130' 2 4/10/201812:00 60 0 309 '070130' 4 4/10/201812:00 60 0 335 '070130' 2 4/10/201813:00 60 0 314 '070130' 4 4/10/201813:00 60 0 363 '070130' 2 4/10/201814:00 60 0 389 '070130' 4 4/10/201814:00 60 0 440 '070130' 2 4/10/201815:00 60 0 340 '070130' 4 4/10/201815:00 60 0 608 '070130' 2 4/10/201816:00 60 0 434 '070130' 4 4/10/201816:00 60 0 639 '070130' 2 4/10/201817:00 60 0 388 '070130' 4 4/10/201817:00 60 0 918 '070130' 2 4/10/201818:00 60 0 317 '070130' 4 4/10/201818:00 60 0 678 '070130' 2 4/10/201819:00 60 0 220 '070130' 4 4/10/201819:00 60 0 377 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 20:00 60 0 145 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 20:00 60 0 271 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 21:00 60 0 154 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 21:00 60 0 189 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 22:00 60 0 40 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 22:00 60 0 72 '070130' 2 4/10/2018 23:00 60 0 21 '070130' 4 4/10/2018 23:00 60 0 36 ADT 12807 AM (8-9) 1130 PM (5-6) 1306 VDOT Provided Traffic Data '070130' 2 4/11/2018 0:00 60 0 9 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 0:00 60 0 26 '070130' 2 4/11/20181:00 60 0 6 '070130' 4 4/11/20181:00 60 0 7 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 2:00 60 0 5 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 2:00 60 0 5 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 3:00 60 0 7 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 3:00 60 0 9 '070130' 2 4/11/20184:00 60 0 23 '070130' 4 4/11/20184:00 60 0 7 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 5:00 60 0 102 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 5:00 60 0 13 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 6:00 60 0 310 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 6:00 60 0 88 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 7:00 60 0 729 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 7:00 60 0 308 '070130' 2 4/11/20188:00 60 0 704 '070130' 4 4/11/20188:00 60 0 426 '070130' 2 4/11/20189:00 60 0 445 '070130' 4 4/11/20189:00 60 0 290 '070130' 2 4/11/201810:00 60 0 388 '070130' 4 4/11/201810:00 60 0 268 '070130' 2 4/11/201811:00 60 0 330 '070130' 4 4/11/201811:00 60 0 344 '070130' 2 4/11/201812:00 60 0 337 '070130' 4 4/11/201812:00 60 0 381 '070130' 2 4/11/201813:00 60 0 315 '070130' 4 4/11/201813:00 60 0 364 '070130' 2 4/11/201814:00 60 0 367 '070130' 4 4/11/201814:00 60 0 411 '070130' 2 4/11/201815:00 60 0 358 '070130' 4 4/11/201815:00 60 0 527 '070130' 2 4/11/201816:00 60 0 477 '070130' 4 4/11/201816:00 60 0 687 '070130' 2 4/11/201817:00 60 0 393 '070130' 4 4/11/201817:00 60 0 875 '070130' 2 4/11/201818:00 60 0 316 '070130' 4 4/11/201818:00 60 0 628 '070130' 2 4/11/201819:00 60 0 213 '070130' 4 4/11/201819:00 60 0 337 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 20:00 60 0 157 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 20:00 60 0 274 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 21:00 60 0 115 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 21:00 60 0 187 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 22:00 60 0 48 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 22:00 60 0 86 '070130' 2 4/11/2018 23:00 60 0 16 '070130' 4 4/11/2018 23:00 60 0 40 ADT 12758 AM (8-9) 1130 PM (5-6) 1268 2018 Avg. 12260 AM (8-9) 1118 PM (5-6) 1242 VDOT Provided Traffic Data '070130' 2 3/31/20210:00 60 0 13 '070130' 4 3/31/20210:00 60 0 10 '070130' 2 3/31/20211:00 60 0 2 '070130' 4 3/31/20211:00 60 0 4 '070130' 2 3/31/20212:00 60 0 4 '070130' 4 3/31/20212:00 60 0 3 '070130' 2 3/31/20213:00 60 0 8 '070130' 4 3/31/20213:00 60 0 2 '070130' 2 3/31/20214:00 60 0 18 '070130' 4 3/31/20214:00 60 0 2 '070130' 2 3/31/20215:00 60 0 75 '070130' 4 3/31/20215:00 60 0 22 '070130' 2 3/31/20216:00 60 0 234 '070130' 4 3/31/20216:00 60 0 91 '070130' 2 3/31/20217:00 60 0 593 '070130' 4 3/31/20217:00 60 0 223 '070130' 2 3/31/20218:00 60 0 499 '070130' 4 3/31/20218:00 60 0 407 '070130' 2 3/31/20219:00 60 0 416 '070130' 4 3/31/20219:00 60 0 247 '070130' 2 3/31/202110:00 60 0 342 '070130' 4 3/31/202110:00 60 0 295 '070130' 2 3/31/202111:00 60 0 336 '070130' 4 3/31/202111:00 60 0 338 '070130' 2 3/31/202112:00 60 0 358 '070130' 4 3/31/202112:00 60 0 382 '070130' 2 3/31/202113:00 60 0 320 '070130' 4 3/31/202113:00 60 0 355 '070130' 2 3/31/202114:00 60 0 338 '070130' 4 3/31/202114:00 60 0 397 '070130' 2 3/31/202115:00 60 0 317 '070130' 4 3/31/202115:00 60 0 532 '070130' 2 3/31/202116:00 60 0 432 '070130' 4 3/31/202116:00 60 0 666 '070130' 2 3/31/202117:00 60 0 295 '070130' 4 3/31/202117:00 60 0 627 '070130' 2 3/31/202118:00 60 0 279 '070130' 4 3/31/202118:00 60 0 391 '070130' 2 3/31/202119:00 60 0 158 '070130' 4 3/31/202119:00 60 0 241 '070130' 2 3/31/202120:00 60 0 92 '070130' 4 3/31/202120:00 60 0 187 '070130' 2 3/31/202121:00 60 0 55 '070130' 4 3/31/202121:00 60 0 86 '070130' 2 3/31/202122:00 60 0 35 '070130' 4 3/31/202122:00 60 0 44 '070130' 2 3/31/202123:00 60 0 17 '070130' 4 3/31/202123:00 60 0 36 ADT 10824 AM (8-9) 906 PM (4-5) 1098 VDOT Provided Traffic Data '070130' 2 4/1/20210:00 60 0 22 '070130' 4 4/1/20210:00 60 0 23 '070130' 2 4/1/20211:00 60 0 1 '070130' 4 4/1/20211:00 60 0 5 '070130' 2 4/1/20212:00 60 0 2 '070130' 4 4/1/20212:00 60 0 7 '070130' 2 4/1/20213:00 60 0 11 '070130' 4 4/1/20213:00 60 0 5 '070130' 2 4/1/20214:00 60 0 19 '070130' 4 4/1/20214:00 60 0 9 '070130' 2 4/1/20215:00 60 0 81 '070130' 4 4/1/20215:00 60 0 14 '070130' 2 4/1/20216:00 60 0 250 '070130' 4 4/1/20216:00 60 0 77 '070130' 2 4/1/20217:00 60 0 592 '070130' 4 4/1/20217:00 60 0 219 '070130' 2 4/1/20218:00 60 0 584 '070130' 4 4/1/20218:00 60 0 436 '070130' 2 4/1/20219:00 60 0 430 '070130' 4 4/1/20219:00 60 0 270 '070130' 2 4/1/202110:00 60 0 393 '070130' 4 4/1/202110:00 60 0 316 '070130' 2 4/1/202111:00 60 0 400 '070130' 4 4/1/202111:00 60 0 379 '070130' 2 4/1/202112:00 60 0 405 '070130' 4 4/1/202112:00 60 0 416 '070130' 2 4/1/202113:00 60 0 358 '070130' 4 4/1/202113:00 60 0 408 '070130' 2 4/1/202114:00 60 0 391 '070130' 4 4/1/202114:00 60 0 423 '070130' 2 4/1/202115:00 60 0 378 '070130' 4 4/1/202115:00 60 0 571 '070130' 2 4/1/202116:00 60 0 494 '070130' 4 4/1/202116:00 60 0 679 '070130' 2 4/1/202117:00 60 0 365 '070130' 4 4/1/202117:00 60 0 699 '070130' 2 4/1/202118:00 60 0 319 '070130' 4 4/1/202118:00 60 0 426 '070130' 2 4/1/202119:00 60 0 170 '070130' 4 4/1/202119:00 60 0 266 '070130' 2 4/1/202120:00 60 0 90 '070130' 4 4/1/202120:00 60 0 188 '070130' 2 4/1/202121:00 60 0 56 '070130' 4 4/1/202121:00 60 0 110 '070130' 2 4/1/202122:00 60 0 42 '070130' 4 4/1/202122:00 60 0 57 '070130' 2 4/1/202123:00 60 0 23 '070130' 4 4/1/202123:00 60 0 35 ADT 11914 AM (8-9) 1020 PM (4-5) 1173 2021 Avg 11369 AM (8-9) 963 PM (4-5) 1136 APPENDIX C Synchro Analysis Reports HCM 6th TWSC 3: Ivy Road & Site Entrance 06/18/2021 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations * T+ M Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 770 465 4 1 0 Future Vol, veh/h 6 770 465 4 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None None - None Storage Length - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 7 906 547 5 1 0 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 552 0 0 1470 550 Stage 1 - - - 550 - Stage 2 - - - 920 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1018 - - 140 535 Stage 1 - - - 578 - Stage 2 - - - 388 - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1018 - - 138 535 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - 138 - Stage 1 - - - 570 - Stage 2 - - - 388 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0 31.3 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1018 - 138 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - 0.009 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 0 31.3 HCM Lane LOS A A D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 Ivy Proper 06/14/2021 Future AM Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report Timmons Group Page 1 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Ivy Road & Site Entrance 06/18/2021 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations * T+ M Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 405 966 1 6 3 Future Vol, veh/h 0 405 966 1 6 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None None - None Storage Length - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 476 1136 1 7 4 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1137 0 0 1613 1137 Stage 1 - - - 1137 - Stage 2 - - - 476 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 614 - - 115 246 Stage 1 - - - 306 - Stage 2 - - - 625 - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 614 - - 115 246 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - 115 - Stage 1 - - - 306 - Stage 2 - - - 625 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 32.8 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 614 140 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.076 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 32.8 HCM Lane LOS A D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.2 Ivy Proper 06/14/2021 Future PM Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report Timmons Group Page 1 ATTACHMENT B LD-448 (7-13-21) Page 1 of 3 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCATION AND DESIGN/STRUCTURE & BRIDGE DESIGN WAIVER REQUEST (See IIM-LD-227 for the definition of Design Waiver) Design Waiver Number: To: I Adam Moore, PE District Location and Design Engineer From Project Designer (L&D, S&B or Consultant): Steve Schmidt, PE , PTOE Project Information UPC N/A State Project N/A Number Federal Project Number N/A District Culpeper District City/County Albemarle County County Proj. Number Project Description 6,500 square feet of office space Start Location (From) Railroad Crossing Bridge End Location (To) Site Driveway Funding Source Private Design ❑ I Minimum Radius ❑ Lane Shift/Tapers ❑ Total Shoulder Width ❑ Buffer Strip Width ❑ Ditch Width ❑ Shared Use Path Width (See ROM, App. A(1)) ❑ Paved Shoulder Width ❑ Superelevation ❑ Guardrail GR-9/GR-2 ❑ Sidewalk Width (See ❑ Curb and Gutter ❑ Intersection Sight Distance IIM-LD-55) I NHS & Interstate System Access Control —100' ❑ Urban Areas and 300' Rural Areas ® Other Turn Lane (See ROM, App. F) ... and Traffic Information Functional Classification GS-6 URBAN MINOR Minimum VDOT GS St'd GS-6 ARTERIAL STREET Min. VDOT Standard 100'T x 100'S VDOT Reference Location N/A Design Speed 35 MPH Posted Speed 35 MPH Existing Dimensions N/A Requested Dimensions 100' T x 100' S LD-448 (7-13-21) Page 2 of 3 Design Waiver request must address the following: • Established design criteria versus proposed and existing criteria (including traffic data, design speed and posted speed) • Reason the appropriate design criteria cannot be met • Justification for the proposed criteria • Any background information which documents, supports or justifies the request • Any mitigation that will be provided to further support or justify the request • Cost to meet standard versus project cost Attach all supporting documentation to this exhibit including crash history (past three years). o���pLTH Op Lt 08/26/21 o U STEPHEN O. SCHMIDT a Lic. No. 049985 Steve Schmidt, PE, PTOE Prepared By: (Timmons Group) Consultant (P.E.'s Name and Company Name) Date: 8/26/2021 Note: The responsible person that prepares the request shall also electronically seal and digitally sign in the block above. All signatures below shall be digital signatures. LD-448 (7-13-21) Page 3 of 3 VDOT Approved By: Click to choose an item. CC: Appropriate Assistant State Location and Design Engineer Project Manager State Geometric Design Engineer State Structure and Bridge Engineer Assistant State Traffic Engineer — Traffic Control Devices ATTACHMENT C Crash Data ed crashes only, Click on dot to open FR300 Diagram (Inside VDOT only) and' yperlink' in Pop Up to open in Goolge Street View: Click anywhere on Map or 'Unpin" to Clear. Hold "Shift' key while r mouse to pan Select Legend :o h gh'ight Injury r/pe C,aam sevxiry Id O lvY Depot Rd 41 eau �- ATTACHMENT D AM-E NVDDTVirginia Department of Transportation February 2015 ACCESS MANAGEMENT EXCEPTION REQUEST: AM-E ACCESS MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS 24 VAC 30-73 SECTION 120 Submitted by: Steve Schmidt, PE, PTOE Date: 8/25/21 Email Address: steve.schmidt@timmons.com Phone: 804-200-6502 Address: 1001 Boulders Parkway Suite 300 Richmond VA 2325 Project Name: Ivy Proper Rte # 250 Locality: Albemarle County Description of Project: The proposed 6,500 square foot office building is located along the north side of US Route 250 (Ivy Road) and to the east of Ivy Depot Road and will be served by a single, shared access point off of US Route 250. The site is located adjacent to an existing 2,200 square foot office building with one access point on US Route 250. With the development, the existing access point will be relocated slightly to the west and a single, shared access point will serve both uses. VDOT District: Culpepper Area Land Use Engineer: Adam Moore, PE NOTES: (1). Submit this form and any attachments to one of the District's Area Land Use Engineers. (2). See Section 120 of the Regulations for details on the requirements, exceptions, and exception request review process. (3). Attach additional information as necessary to justify the exception request(s). (4). If a traffic engineering study is required, the decision on the request will be based on VDOT engineering judgment. (5). Use the LD-440 Design Exception or the LD-448 Design Waiver forms for design and engineering standards, e.g. radius, grade, sight distance. See IIM-LD-227 on VDOT web site for additional instructions. Select the Exception(s) Being Requested ❑ Exception to the shared commercial entrance requirement. (Access M. Regulations Section 120 C.2) Reason for exception: ❑ A. An agreement to share the entrance could not be reached with adjoining property owner. ❑ Attached: Written evidence that adjoining property owner will not share the entrance. ❑ B. Physical constraints: topography, adjacent hazardous land use, stream, wetland, other. ❑ Specify constraint: ❑ Attached: Documentation of constraint such as aerial photo or topographic map. ❑ Exception to the vehicular connection to adjoining undeveloped property requirement. (Section 120 CA) Reason for exception: ❑ A. Physical constraints: topography, adjacent hazardous land use, stream, wetland, other. ❑ Specify constraint: ❑ Attached: Documentation of constraint such as aerial photo or topographic map. ❑ B. Other reason: February 2015 ❑ Exception to the commercial entrance shall not be located within the functional area of an intersection requirement. (See Regulation Section 120 C. 1; Appendix F, Rd Design Manual) ❑ Attached: A traffic engineering study documenting that the operation of the intersection and public safety will not be adversely impacted. ❑ ✓ EXCEPTION TO THE SPACING STANDARDS FOR: • Commercial entrances; intersections/median crossovers (Table 2-2); • Commercial entrances/intersections near interchange ramps (Tables 2-3, 2-4); or • Corner clearance (Figure 4-4). Appendix F, Road Design Manual Information on the Exception Request ✓❑ ON A STATE HIGHWAY Functional classification: Principal Arterial: ❑ Minor Arterial: ❑✓ Collector: ❑ Local: [i Posted speed limit: 35 mph NEAR AN INTERCHANGE RAMP (Submittal of a traffic engineering study required) CORNER CLEARANCE (Submittal of a traffic engineering study required) Type of intersection/entrance: Signalized ® Unsignalized ® Full Access 2 Partial Access Required spacing distance 470 ft Proposed spacing distance 160 ft Requested exception: Reduction in required spacing 310 ft REASON FOR EXCEPTION: ❑ A. To be located on an older, established business corridor along a highway where existing spacing did not meet the standards prior to 7/1/08 or 10/14/09. (Regulation section 120 C.3.c) ❑ Attached: Dated aerial photo of corridor identifying proposed entrance/intersection location. ❑✓ B. Not enough property frontage to meet spacing standard, but the applicant does not want a partial access right-in/right-out entrance. (Section 120 C.3.f) ❑✓ Attached: A traffic engineering study documenting that left turn movements at the entrance will not have a negative impact on highway operation or safety. ❑ C. To be located within a new urbanism mixed use type development. (Section 120 C.3.d) ❑ Attached: The design of the development and compliance with intersection sight distance. ❑ D. The proposed entrance meets the signal warrants but does not meet the signalized intersection spacing standard. The applicant requests an exception to the spacing standard. ❑ Attached: A traffic engineering study that (i) evaluates the location's suitability for a roundabout and (ii) provides documentation that the proposed signal will not impact safety and traffic flow. (Section 120 C.5) February 2015 ❑ E. The development's 2"d (or additional) entrance does not meet the spacing standards but is necessary for the streets to be accepted into the secondary system. (section 120 C.3.e) ❑ Attached: Information on the development that identifies the location of entrances. ❑ F. To be located within the limits of a VDOT and locality approved access management corridor plan. ❑ Attached: Aerial photo of corridor identifying proposed entrance/intersection location. (Sect 120 C.3.1b) FOR VDOT USE ONL Recommendation on Exception Request: Approve Deny Date: Area Land Use Engineer or: Name Remarks: Exception Request Action: Approved❑ Denied❑ Date: District Administrator or Designee: Name (and position if Designee) Remarks: District Staff: Please email copy to Bradley.Shelton(d)VDOT.Virginia.gov 3