Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201200037 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2012-05-09Christopher Perez From: Philip Custer Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 1:46 PM To: Tom Gallagher; 'Tom Gallagher'; hwhite @wwassociates.net; rumberger @wwassociates.net Cc: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: District Avenue Road Extension Plan VDOT comments... From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT) [ mailto:J oel.DeNunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 1:44 PM To: Philip Custer Subject: District Avenue Road Extension Plan Phil, I have reviewed the subject plan and have the following comments: 1. The receiving ingress lanes need to each be 15 feet edge of pavement to edge of pavement as shown in the approved Route 29 widening plan and have the same transition length of 112 feet with the straight taper down to the normal pavement width. 2. The lane drop needs to be placed outside of the transition area for the widened receiving lanes and needs to be verified that the merge area will not back up traffic into the Route 29 through lanes with a traffic analysis. 3. The proposed profile for the connection needs to be the same as the approved Route 29 widening plan on sheet 41A, entrance profiles. The widening of Route 29 will be on the same cross slope as the existing road which is about 1.6 %. At the edge of the travel way, the slope continues down at 1.6% with a vertical curve for a 25 mph design speed. The length of vertical curve shown on the Route 29 plan is 55.44 feet but that may change based on the grade of the proposed road. The Route 29 plan second grade went back up at 0.48 %. 4. The capacity of the lanes exiting the site onto Route 29 should be verified with a capacity analysis. Please let me know if there are any questions. Thanks Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. VDOT Culpeper Land Development 434 - 589 -5871 joel .denunzioCcbvdot.virginia.gov