Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800053 Review Comments 2008-02-08Route 250 West Task Force County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 -4596 TO: Joan McDowell, Principal Pla ner FROM: Route 250 West Task Forc REFERENCE: PROJECT: SDP 2007 — 00157 UVA Long Term Acute Care Hospital DATE: February 8, 2008 The Route 250 West Task Force is charged with making recommendations to the Board of Supervisors with regard to all transportation impacts on the Route 250 West Corridor. The Task Force appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the University of Virginia Long Term Acute Care Hospital. The Task Force is concerned that the service vehicle access, which is located to the west of the main Northridge entrance, is not safe. The Task Force believes the proposed service entrance for the ambulances may not be safe for service vehicles and employees that must use it to exit to Route 250 due to marginal site distance. This access point is particularly close to a crest west of this service entrance on Route 250. East -bound vehicles on Route 250 topping this crest may not have time to react to vehicles exiting the service vehicle entrance traveling east. Additionally, this entrance could experience additional traffic once the warehouse is fully utilized. It is the Task Force's understanding that the existing main Northridge entrance has already met the criteria for a traffic signal. The Task Force recommends that this signal be installed and operating prior to facility use. The Task Force does not support the installation of a traffic signal at the service entrance. The Task Force recommends that the applicant address this potential safety hazard. Again, the Task Force appreciates the opportunity to comment on this important community project. Please feel free to contact Juandiago Wade, the Task Force staff contact, if you have any questions. Cc: Gerald Gatobu Route 250 West Task Force OF AIB IRGINI COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 x3368 Fax (434) 972 -4126 TO: Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner FROM: Juandiego R. Wade, Transportation Planner DATE: March 10, 2008 REF: PROJECT: SDP 2007 — 00157 UVA Long Term Acute Care Hospital I have had an opportunity to review the Long Term Acute Care Hospital project traffic impact analysis (TIA). After conferring with VDOT, I offer the following comments: The Korean Church was and proposed Fire Station was not considered in the TIA. The inclusion of these projects is critical in determining the background traffic. The TIA factored in a 5% annual growth rate for Route 250. Staff and VDOT believe this is too high. The County typically uses a 2% growth rate for background traffic. It was recommended for the applicant to make every effort possible to allow for inter - parcel connection. This would increase the time in which the main entrance would meet the warrants for a traffic signal and remove traffic for he service entrance which does not have ideal site distance on Route 250. Please contact me if you have any questions. Cc: Joan McDowell Glenn Brooks Joel Denunzio Chuck Proctor qL RGIN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 x3368 Fax (434) 972 -4126 T0 Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner FROM: Juandiego R. Wade, Transportation Planner ; t DATE: March 12, 2008 REF: PROJECT: SDP 2007 — 00157 UVA Long 'Perm Acute Care Hospital I have had an opportunity to review the Long Term Acute Care Hospital project traffic impact analysis (TIA). Please find below the comments from VDOT and Community Development staff. The Korean Church and proposed Fire Station use on the two rear parcels were not considered in the TIA. These projects need to be included in the TIA. The inclusion of these projects is critical in determining the background traffic. The TIA factored in a 5.5 0 /6 annual growth rate for Route 250. Staff and VDOT believe this is too high. Based on a review of the historical trends the rate should be between 0.5% and 1.0 %. Based on the proposed uses, inter - parcel connections within the properties are needed to allow full use of a proposed signalized intersection. Staff and VDOT recommend all the parcels be interconnected. This would increase the time in which the main entrance would meet the warrants for a traffic signal and remove traffic from the service entrance which does not have ideal site distance on Route 250. The existing entrances are approximately 1990 ft for the main entrance and 1560 ft for the service entrance from the existing signalized intersection to the west (Route 677 and Route 250). Based on these distance the main entrance appears to be the best location for a possible signal (The minimum spacing for signals on Arterial Roadway with 45 MPH is 1760 ft). Please contact me if you have any questions. Cc: Joan McDowell Glenn Brooks Joel Denunzio Chuck Proctor COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 DATE: April 17th, 2003 Ammy Gcorge 919 2nd Street S.E. Charlottesville, VA, 22902. Keith Whipple 301 East High Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 RE: SDP- 2008 - 00052 &SDP 2008 -00053 L I'ACH Preliminary Site Plan/Seig :Maintenance. Dear Sir :Madam, The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Preliminary comments for the following divisions of the Department of Community Development and other agencies, as applicable, are attached: Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner) Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Engineer) Albemarle County Division of Planning (Principle Planner ARB) Albemarle County Division of Inspections (Building Official) Virginia Department of Transportation (VDO "T). Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA). Albemarle County Eire and Rescue. Albemarle County Geographic and Data Services (GDS) Continents reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed, and should not be considered final. llowever, the Site Review Committee has attempted to identify all issues that could affect approval of the proposed project. make the revisions that have been identified as necessary for preliminary approl al by the Site Review Committee. If you choose not to make the requested recisions. please submit in writing justification for not incorporating such revisions. Submit eight (3) full size copies and one (1) 11" s 17" copy to the Department of Community Development including responses to each of the attached comments of the Site Rev iew C onunittce by Monday April 28th 2008. Failure to submit this information by this date will result in suspension of the review schedule. Review will resunie Iv hen revisions are submitted along with a reinstatement fee of S65. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. sincerely, Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Current Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902_4596 Phone: ( -5832 Ext 3385 Fax: (434)972-4126 Application #:SDP200800052 Short Review Comments Project Name: Sleg Maintenance • Prel Preliminary— Non - residential Date Completed:04/07/2008 This proposal is scheduled for ARB review on May 19, 2008. Comments will be provided after that Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:NO OBJECTION. Date Completed:04 /11/2008 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer Inspections Review Status: No Objection Reviews Comments: State -owned property (Rector & Visitors of U. Va.), local building official has no jurisdiction Date Completed:04/02/2008 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:This proposal is scheduled for ARB review on May 19, 2008. Comments will be provided after that meeting. Date Completed: Reviewer: Philip Custer Engineer Z &CD Review Status: Pending Reviews Comments: SRC 4/17/08 Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 Application #: SDP200800O53 Short Review Comments Project Name: UVA Long Term Acute Care Hos ital -el PreliminaProjectPrP _- ry —Non- residential Date Completed: 04/07/2008 Reviewer: Andrew Slack E911 Review Status: No Objection Reviews Comments: NO OBJECTION. Date Completed:04/11/2008 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer Inspections Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:Based on plans revised March 24, 2008. Relocate the barrier -free parking space to the group of 4 parking spaces that are closer to the buildingentrance. Provide a curb cut in the sidewalk immediately across the driveway from this relocatedparkingspace. Delete the property line that bisects the east wing of the building. Date Completed:04;02 /2008 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:This proposal is scheduled for review by the ARB on May 19,200 . 8. Comments will be provided afterthatmeeting. Date Completed:0411512008 Reviewer:Philip Custer Engineer Z &CD Review Status: Requested Changes Reviews Comments: SRC 4/17/08 Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed on: Wednesday. April 16, 2008 Albemarl Gay ..w Service Authority TO: Gerald Gatobu FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer DATE: April 15, 2008 RE: Site Plan Technical Review for:UVA LTAC Hospital - Preliminary SDP200800053 TM 59 -23B & 23131 The below checked items apply to this site. X 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for: X A. Water and sewer B. Water only C. Water only to existing structure D. Limited service X 2. A 12 inch water line is located on site. X 3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located 280' distant from this site plan, is 2,383 Gpm + at 20 psi residual. X 4. An 8 inch sewer line is located on site. 5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed. X 6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future easements. 7. and plans are currently under review. 8. and plans have been received and approved. 9. No plans are required. X 10. Final water plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative approval. 11. Final site plan may /may not be signed. X 12. RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections. 13. City of Charlottesville approval for sewer. Comments: Notify RWSA of activity in force main vicinity. No retaining walls or stairs in water line easement. Backflow prevention required. Provide plumbing fixture count. Sewer lateral for existing bldg. might be in conflict. Tap hydrant off 12" main and move in front of curb. No water line under canopy. Relocate water line to travel way. Provide final landscape plan for review and approval. The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows: meter locations water line size waterline locations sewer line size 168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434977 -4511 • Fax (434)979 -0698 www.serviceauthoriy.org Alhemarle County Service Auth6rity sewer line locations expected wastewater flows easements expected water demands 168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434977 -4511 • Fax (434)979 -0698 www.serviceauthoriy.org Alemarle County Service Auth6rity TO: Gerald Gatobu FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer DATE: April 15, 2008 RE: Site Plan Technical Review for:Sieg Maintenance - Preliminary SDP200800052 The below checked items apply to this site. X 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for: X A. Water and sewer B. Water only C. Water only to existing structure D. Limited service X 2.A 12 inch water line is located on site. X 3.Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located 280' distant from this site plan, is 2583 Gpm + at 20 psi residual. X 4.An 8 inch sewer line is located on site. 5.An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed. X 6.No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future easements. 7.and plans are currently under review. 8.and plans have been received and approved. X 9.No plans are required. 10.Final and plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative approval. 11.Final site plan may /may not be signed. 12.RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections. 13.City of Charlottesville approval for sewer. Comments: Identify water item in paved area. Field locate water line. Profile water and sewer in vicinity of drainage structure. Trees must be 10' off water line. The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows: meter locations water line size waterline locations sewer line size sewer line locations expected wastewater flows easements expected water demands 168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434977 -4511 • Fax (434)979 -0698 www.serviceauthoriy.org F VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper, Virginia 22701 David S. Ekern, P.E. VirginiaDOT.org COMMISSIONER April 14` '' 008 Mr. Glenn Brooks Department of Engineering and Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Subject: Site Review Meeting Comments April W',2008 site review meeting Dear Mr. Brooks: Below are VDOT's comments on the Site Plans for the April 14 2007 Site Review Committee Meeting: SDP - 2008 -00052 Sies Maintenance — Preliminary (Gerald Gatobu) The additional parking at this site to support the LTACH building will increase the use of the existing entrance. Previous comments form the traffic study for the LTACH site were provided by VDOT and include comments referring to inter - parcel connections to allow traffic to access the main entrance where there may be a traffic signal. The site plan should not be approved until comments by the county and VDOT pertaining to the traffic study have been addressed. SDP - 2008 -00053 UVA Long Term Acute Care Hospital — Preliminary (Gerald Gatobu) Previous comments by the county and VDOT about the TIA need to be addressed prior to site plan approval. These comments discuss inter - parcel connections with the adjacent Northridge Hospital and adequate access for a proposed Fire Station and Church on the two back parcels which appear to share an entrance with this site. SDP - 2008 -00054 Timberwood Grill — Ntaior (Summer Frederick) There are plantings along route 1722 in front of the parking area that are proposed on this plan that lie within the sight distance easement for the intersection of route 1722 and 1754. These plantings appear to restrict the sight distance at the intersection and need to be relocated to allow safe ingress and egress at the intersection. f ___YFARS dE tRANSP4RTAT10N ESCEi tEMCE 1 9 0 6 2 0 0 6 SUB - 2008 -00093 Glenmore(Phase 2- Section S -5) Preliminary (Megan Yaniglos) All proposed roads are internal to a private subdivision. Please request the applicants provide a written description of revisions with re- submissions. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me prior to sharing these comments with the applicants. Sincerely, Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Residency Program Manager VDOT Charlottesville Residency 434 -293 -0011 cc Bill Fritz, David Benish, Juan Wade, Elaine Echols, Joan McDowell, Judith Wiegand, Margaret Maliszewski, David Pennock, Francis McCall, Jon Sharp, Summer Frederick, Patrick Lawrence, and John Giometti ALfjf, 9 x r f( mX County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Ammy George /Keith Whipple From:Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner Division:Zoning and Current Development Date: April 15" 2008 Subject: SDP2008- 00052 &53 LTACH /SEIG Preliminary The County of Albemarle Division of Zoning and Current Development will grant or recommend approval of the preliminary site plan referred to above once the following comments have been addressed: [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] Comments for SDP200800052: 1. An instrument assuring continuation of offsite parking will have to be provided per section 4.12.8 ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES: Please provide an instrument assuring continuation of offsite parking 2. A shared parking agreement will have to be provided per zoning ordinance section 4.12.10 SHARED PARKING] Shared parking will have to be approved by the Zoning administrator. Please refer to section 4.12.10.a, b, and c for further information. 3. Stand alone parking is allowed in the (LI) light Industry District by special use permit as per section 14.12.11 STAND ALONE PARKING] Stand alone parking is allowed in the (LI) Light Industry District by special use permit. Tax Map and Parcel 59 -23CI has no primary use. Parking on this parcel will be stand alone parking which will require a special use permit. 4. 32.5.6. (b) Please provide the maximum square footage for both industrial uses on TMP59- 23D and 59 -23F 32.5.6. (b) Yard and building separation requirements: Please note on the site plan that the front setback is 50' from any public street right -of -way. A note on the plan indicates that a building exists. Please revise. 6. 32.5.6. (b) Please provide the maximum number of employees for each of the warehouses 32.5.6. (b) Please include on the site plan the floor area ratio and the lot coverage for the two warehouses. 8. 32.5.6. (b) Please include the height of the structures on the site plan. 9. 32.5.6. (b) Please provide a schedule of parking including the maximum amount required and the amount provided. Please refer to section 14.12.6 MINIMUM NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES FOR SCHEDULED USES] of the zoning ordinance Wholesaling or warehousing use not othervi identified: One (1) space per employee plus one 1) space per each five hundred (500) square feet offloor area open to the public customer parking, but in all cases a minitnum of tvti (2) customer parking spaces. As stated above please provide the required amount of parking for each warehouse. I. Additionally, the maximum number of parking spaces for each warehouse cannot be exceed per section [4.12.4.a] Maximum number of spaces. The number ofparking spaces in a parking area may not exceed the number of spaces required by this section by more than twenty (20) percent. Please provide the required amount of parking spaces for each of the warehouses on Tax Map Parcels 59 -23D and 59 -23F. The parking spaces on each parcel cannot be exceeded by more than (20) percent. Please provide the square footage for a) The 1 story brick and metal warehouse on tax Map and Parcel 59 -23D b) The 1 story brick and metal warehouse on tax Map and Parcel 59 -23F This will help in calculating the required amount of parking for both warehouses. Based on these calculations, the maximum number of spaces required for each parcel will be evident therefore the 20 percent will not be exceeded]. 10. 32.5.6(b) Please provide the amount of paved parking and vehicular circulation area for all the sites. This figure will be used to calculate the interior landscaping requirements in the landscape plan. 11. 32.7.2.8 Provision shall be made for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways which will enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and from the site to adjacent property. 12. Some of the above parking requirements may be waived per section [4.12.2 APPLICABILITY] of the zoning ordinance. 4.12.2. c. Modification or icaiver. The limitation on the maximum number of parking spaces required by subsection 4.12.4(a) and the design requirements in sections 4.12.15, 4.12.16, 4.12.17, 4.12.18 and 4.12.19 may be modified or waived, and in any commercial or industrial zoning district the minimum number of parking spaces required by section 4.12.6 may be modified, in an individual case if the zoning administrator finds that the public health, safety or welfare would be equally or better served by the modification or waiver and that the modification or waiver would not otherwise be contrary to the purpose and intent of this chapter. 13. Landscape Plan: Provide calculations for I. Street trees required [per linear square footage of public right -of -way] II. Interior parking lot trees [5% of parking and vehicular circulation area] III. Canopy requirements 14. If outdoor lighting is proposed please provide a lighting plan (at final site plan). 15. The survey by Thomas Lincoln does not match what is shown on our GIS web (is this is the current (latest) and most accurate survey? please let me know). Property lines for Tax Map and Parcel 59 -23D and 59 -23F are shown as extending all the way to the railway line on Albemarle County GIS web. Comments for SDP200800052 LTACH 1. The sanitary sewer is shown as being connected along route US Route 250 on the LTACH site plan. The sanitary sewer connection should match the sanitary sewer connection shown in the sanitary sewer extension plans. 2. Indicate on the site plan the maximum number of employees. 3. Street trees, Interior parking lot trees, and canopy calculations are site specific. Plantings on one parcel cannot account for calculations on another parcel. Street trees along state route 250 for TMP 59 -23B1 must be calculated separate from those for North Ridge, and the same goes for interior parking lot landscaping, and canopy calculations. A clear definition of boundaries i.e. boundary line adjustment would remedy this concern. Please contact Gerald Gatobu at the Division of Zoning and Current Development at 296 -5832 ext. 3385 for further information. 9 a N County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Gerald Gatobu, Current Development Project Planner From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review Date: 15 April 2008 Subject: UVA Long Term Acute Care Hospital Preliminary Site plan (SDP- 2008 - 00053) The preliminary site plan for the UVA Long Term Acute Care Hospital property has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development can recommend approval to the plan aver the following changes have been made. 1. Please provide an amendment to the traffic impact and parking study to include the additional parking being proposed for the Sieg Maintenance site. 2. Please provide interconnection between the three parcels involved in this plan so that Route 250 will not be used as the interconnecting travelway. [32.7.2.5] 3. Please provide a Modified simple spreadsheet for each SWM drainage area on site. Please note that as policy, engineering review does not allow the water quality treatment of one drainage area to "overtreat" for other areas of the site. The runoff from each watershed leaving the site must be treated to the required removal rate. For instance, the biofilter will have a separate removal rate computation and it is likely that the resulting removal rate would be closer to 65% than 50% as shown on the plan. 4. The use of the parking spaces of the Kirtley Warehouse as mentioned in the parking study will require waivers of County Code 4.12.15.c and 4.12.17.a from the Zoning Administrator. The access drive to the warehouse is approximately a 15% grade. This is steeper than the ordinance requirement of a maximum 10% grade for travelways and maximum 5% grade for parking areas. Engineering review will not support either of these waivers. 5. Please move the entrance from the rear of the hospital farther north. Engineering believes the entrance is too close to the intersection of the access easement and Route 250. 6. Please show all of the grading necessary for the creation of the biofilter facility. This will be helpful in writing the critical slope wavier report. 7. A critical slope waiver report will be written separate from this comment letter. The following comments are not required for preliminary site plan approval but will need to be addressed during the final site plan process. 1. The width of the curb cannot be included in the width of the sidewalk. Sidewalks adjacent to parking spaces must be 6tt in width or bumper blocks must be provided. 2. It appears from the grading of the accessway on the southwest side of the building that the filterra boxes will need to be relocated so they are designed to capture as much water as possible while still having a bypass inlet available. 3. It appears an inlet is needed in the ambulance drop -off area. Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 3 JI ' County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Gerald Gatobu, Current Development Project Planner From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review Date: 15 April 2008 Subject: Sieg Maintenance Preliminary Site Plan (SDP- 2008- 00052) The preliminary site plan for the Sieg Maintenance property has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development can recommend approval to the plan after the following changes have been made. 1. Please show curb and gutter on the plan where it has not been waived. A waiver of the curb and gutter standard will not be given for this project except at those locations to the east end of the site where curb cuts allow water to pass into the biotilter and swale. Engineering review feels that allowing water to travel through landscaped parking islands would create stabilization issues and long term erosion problems. From each of these curb cuts where the waiver has been granted, there should be a grassed channel that is kept free of landscaping or other groundcover. 2. It appears there are several issues with the number of lot lines and parcels for this single building. Each separate TMP parcel needs the appropriate amount of spaces based on the building square footage within it. Boundary line adjustments for these properties seem unavoidable. It appears combining TMP's 59 -23D, 59 -23F, 59 -23C1, and the Folly Drive easement into one parcel would simplify this application. 3. Please update the parking and traffic study for the LTACH development to include the amendment to the Sieg Maintenance parking lot and vehicle demand loads. 4. Please provide vehicular interparcel connection to TMP 59 -23B. [32.7.2.5] 5. Please show all critical slopes on the plan even though they may not exist on the parcel. 6. Please show adequate sight distance onto Route 250 on the plan. 7. Please provide pedestrian access to LTACH through the Northridge site. A minor amendment for the Northridge site should be processed at this time for the improvements shown to TMP 59 -23B in the LTACH and Sieg Maintenance preliminary site plan applications. [32.7.2.8] S. The area allotted for SWM appears to be large enough for water quality treatment and detention. The final review of the SWM computations will be performed during the WPO submittal. The following comments are not required for preliminary site plan approval but will need to be addressed during the final site plan process. 1. The width of the curb cannot be included in the width of the sidewalk. The sidewalk on the southern edge of the building measures to be 4.5'. 2. Sidewalks adjacent to parking spaces must either be 611 in width or 511 in width with bumper blocks in the parking spaces. Sidewalk widths are measured exclusive of curb. Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 3. Parking spaces may have a depth of 16ft, if a 2ft overhang is available, but the 16ft distance must be measured from the end of the space (the travelway) to the face of the curb (or as shown in this instance, a bumper block). 4. There is not an available 2ft overhang for the parking spaces at the western end of the lot due to the row of bushes. 5. The addition of the northeastern parking lot displaces many utility items that appear to be necessary for the building. Where are these items to be relocated? If some of the items are to remain, the sidewalk must be widened to accommodate. 6. The maximum grade in the parking lot is 5 %. This includes areas where there is parallel parking. 7. It appears that a dumpster pad may be needed by the building occupants. Joel, Below are my comments on the Traffic Study for the North Ridge Development: The growth rate used for the background development is very excessive. Based on a review of the historical trends the rate should be between 0.5% and 1.0% not 5.5 %; The study did not include a recently proposal for Church and Fire Station uses on the two rear parcels. These changes need to be included; The existing entrances are approximately 1990 ft for the main entrance and 1560 ft for the service entrance from the existing signalized intersection to the west Route 677 and Route 250). Based on these distance the main entrance appears to be the best location for a possible signal (The minimum spacing for signals on Arterial Roadway with 45 MPH is 1760 ft). Based on the proposed uses inter - parcel connections within the properties are needed to allows full use of a proposed signalized intersection. Recommend all the parcels be interconnected.