Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
ZMA202200002 Study 2022-06-21
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ADDENDUM To: Kevin McDermott Cc: Ashley Davies Alan Taylor Scott Collins, P.E. From: Carl Hultgren, P.E., PTOE Date: June 21, 2022 Albemarle County Planning Manager Riverbend Development Riverbend Development Collins Engineering Subject: Slag Property -Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Addendum Introduction GOROVE SLA_ DE Transportation Planners and Engineers AP � LTH O U CARLA.HULTG Lic. No. 04W -10 A (rs'r94-ax 0, �N\ �sSfONALEN� Riverbend Development is proposing to construct a mixed -use center in the southwest quadrant of the 1-64 at US 29 interchange. The original Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was performed by Ramey Kemp Associates (RKA) in February 2022. The purpose of this addendum is to address County and VDOT comments on that study, and update the build -out analysis scenario to reflect the most current site plan. This analysis was developed in accordance with County and VDOT standards. The County and VDOT issued review comments on the original TIA in March 2022. Following are those comments and a response to each. County Comments dated March 25: Traffic Impact Analysis 1. The speed limits listed for both Route 29 and 1-64 in Section 1.5 are not correct • The speed limit for 1-64 has been corrected. Based on VDOT speed limit data and posted signage, the speed limit on Route 29 is 55 mph in the vicinity of the site. A note has been added that the speed limit of Route 29 switches to 60 mph southwest of Shepards Hill Road. 2. The funded Fontaine Avenue Interchange Project proposes to remove the left turn from NB US 29 to WB 1-64 and replace it with an innovative interchange concept that allows vehicles making that movement to perform a u-turn at Fontaine Ave and a right turn to get onto 1-64 westbound. I've attached a concept drawing of that proposed intersection reconfiguration. The analysis doesn't provide any information to show if this funded concept will operate acceptably with the addition of the Sieg Property traffic. It appears that the estimated increase in daily traffic from the Sieg Property making that movement is approximately 233 vehicles a day. Can you confirm that number and is there an analysis that can be done to determine how that additional traffic will impact operations for that innovative intersection design? • As shown in Table 5, the site is projected to generate 5,153 daily outbound trips, with 10% of those going to 1-64 westbound, so this project is expected to add 515 vehicles per day to the Fontaine Avenue U-turn ramp. The ramp terminal will be signalized, but that intersection is outside the scope of this TIA. Table 3 shows that this projected is expected to add just 39 vehicles to the U-turn movement in the AM peak hour, and 60 vehicles to the U-turn movement in the PM peak hour. Assuming the cycle length will be 90 seconds, that would be just 1 additional vehicle per cycle in the AM peak hour, and 1.5 vehicles per cycle in the PM peak hour, which is a minimal impact. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 / T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 2 3. The NB US 29 to EB 1-64 will increase in delay by 30 seconds and go from LOS D to LOSE between the No -build and the Build scenario. Is there any opportunity to improve these operations? • With the revised site plan, the northbound right -turn delay increases by 19 seconds in the PM peak hour between the no -build conditions and the build with Green T conditions. When VDOT reconfigured the ramp terminal, they provided approximately 600 feet of storage in the northbound right -turn lane, and the expected queue for this movement is just 99 feet under build (2030) conditions. This intersection is also expected to operate at LOS C overall in the PM peak hour under build conditions. 4. Table 7 shows a nearly 600' queue for the SB thru traffic at the Proposed site driveway under the Green T scenario. This appears to block the Gold Eagle Dr intersection. Will that have compounding effects to traffic at that intersection? • The proposed Green T intersection is approximately 1,000 feet south of Gold Eagle Drive, so the southbound queue is not expected to impact this intersection. The February 2022 TIA reported Synchro queues, but at the request of VDOT, this addendum reports the SimTraffic queue, which is 392 feet. 5. What is the reason that a Green T was selected over the roundabout at the Proposed Site Driveway? • U.S. 29 is a high-speed Principal Arterial with a posted speed limit of 55 mph to 60 mph at the approximate location of the potential roundabout. Roundabouts are rarely installed on high-speed Principal Arterials —they are more suited for low -speed collector roadways. As shown in Table 6, a roundabout would be projected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour under build conditions. VDOT Comments dated March 17: 1. Comments from Traffic Engineering: a. Please provide a copy of signal timing data employed in analysis • Signal timings have been included in the Appendix with this submission. b. Page 36, Table 3: Given the delay output from Synchro, it would have been prudent to confirm the queue lengths with SimTraffic as they could potentially be longer. • SimTraffic queue lengths are reported in this TIA addendum. c. Page 40, Table 7: Roundabouts are to be analyzed with SIDRA per TOSAM (v2). • The roundabout was analyzed with SIDRA. d. Pages 105 and 106, Appendix G: Can you please explain why 2027 volumes as opposed to 2030 volumes are being used for the turn lane warrant analysis? Per the scoping document, the agreed "Build" year is 2030. • This is a typo — Build 2030 conditions were used for turn lane warrant analyses. e. Page 107, Appendix H: Can you please provide the VJuST outputs in question? • The VJuST outputs have been provided in the Appendix with this submission. f. Per IIM-TE 387.1, "VDOT has established a standard SJR template that should be used for all SJR reports." A soft copy has been made available for your purposes. • An SJR has been submitted with the revised TIA. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum Page 3 June 21, 2022 2. Has closing the Rte 29 median at Teel Ln been discussed with VDOT beforehand, or is this submission intended to be that discussion? • Closing the median break at Gold Eagle Drive / Teel Lane was discussed with the County and VDOT at the TIA scope meeting, and recommended for safety purposes due to proximity of that median break to the 1-64 interchange. 3. Note that the final plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual Appendices B (1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other requirements. • Understood Scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis To be consistent with the February 2022 TIA by RKA, the study area includes the following intersections: • U.S. 29 (Monacan Trail) at 1-64 Westbound On -Ramp • U.S. 29 (Monacan Trail) at 1-64 Eastbound On -Ramp • U.S. 29 (Monacan Trail) at Gold Eagle Drive / Teel Lane • U.S. 29 (Monacan Trail) at Proposed Site Driveway The site location and study intersections are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 shows the revised site plan. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com mi 111111 INNIN &pill oil,; INTERS -FATE 64 Sieg Property — TIA Addendum Page 5 June 21, 2022 Existing (2021) Conditions Existing Roadway Network The Slag Property TIA by RKA dated February 2022 provides a detailed overview of the existing roadway network including speed limits, functional classifications and ADT's. The information from that TIA is repeated in Table 1 below. Interstate 64 Moncan Trail Gold Eagle Drive 55,000 U.S.29 Princi alArterial 55 18,000 480 F0178 Local 25 360 Note that the speed limit on U.S. 29 shifts to 60 mph southwest of the site, past Shepards Hill Road. Existing (2021) Intersection Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis was performed at the study intersections during the weekday AM and PM peak hour under the existing conditions. The results from the February TIA were revised to utilize HCM methodology at the signalized study intersections, the results of which are shown in Table 2. HCM Wh Edition methodology is unable to analyze U-turns and nonconventional NEMA phasing. Therefore, HCM 2000 Signalized methodology was used for signalized intersection analysis. HCM 2000 was also used at the Westbound Ramp to capture two -stage left -turning vehicle movements. SimTraffic results were used to report queue lengths at all study intersections. Synchro, Version 10.3 was used to analyze the study intersections and includes level of service (LOS), delay and queue length comparisons for the turning movements analyzed. Synchro and SimTraffic outputs for the existing (2021) conditions are located in the Appendix. SimTraffic results are from the maximum queue length based on an average of 10 microsimulation runs. Figure 4 from the February TIA shows the existing (2021) peak hour traffic volumes. Tahlp 2- Frictinn r20911 Intprsprtinn Canaritv Gnzlvsis Rpsnits ���WMWPeak Lane Hour PM Peak Hour Ad Intersection Lane Group Storage (ft) dr, Delay (see) Queue Overall LOS LOS Delay (sec) Queue Overall LOSI U.S. 29 at 1-64 NBL 275 B 14.1 86 F 90.8 360 Westbound Ramp NBT _ _ _ 94 N/A _ _ 635 N/A SBT 4 661 NBT - B 13.0 205 C 24.2 241 U.S. 29 at 1-64 NBR 675 B 12.2 104 B C 26.1 78 B Eastbound Ramp SBU/L 350 B 18.8 253 (12.4 Sec) B 17.4 302 (13.1 Sec) SBT - A 0.1 153 A 0.3 31 EBLIT/R - E 43.1 28 F 56.3 52 WBL/r/R - D 27.9 221 B 14.4 43 U.S. 29 at Gold NBU/L 100 A 9.4 14 B 14.3 8 Eagle Drive / Teel NBT/R - - - - N/A - - - N/A Lane SBU/L 100 C 21.1 34 A 9.8 38 SBT - - - - - - - SBR 1 175 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum Page 6 June 21, 2022 VDOT SmartScale Improvements VDOT is planning to close the median break on U.S. 29 at the 1-64 westbound on -ramp, and construct a U-turn lane at the U.S. 29 / Fontaine Avenue interchange by 2030. The U-turn point was assumed to be in place for no -build conditions to provide a direct comparison for build conditions. It was assumed that all northbound left -turns at the U.S. 29 at 1-64 Westbound Ramp will be rerouted as U-turns at Fontaine Avenue, and then turn right onto the 1-64 westbound on -ramp. Under 2030 no -build conditions, the U-turn volume is projected to be 31 vehicles during the AM peak hour and 37 vehicles during the PM peak hour. The proposed mixed -use site is expected to add 39 vehicles to this movement during the AM peak hour and 60 vehicles during the PM peak hour. Table 3 shows the estimated impact of site trips on this U-tum movement. Table 3: Projected Peak Hour Traffic on Fontaine Avenue U-Turn nari � or U-Turn volume Weak Hour PM Peak Hour The U-tum movement is expected to be signalized with the interchange reconfiguration. Assuming that signal will have a cycle length of 90 seconds (40 cycles per hour), then this project will add just 1 vehicle per cycle in the AM peak hour, and 1.5 vehicles per cycle in the PM peak hour, which is a minimal impact. No -Build (2030) Conditions No -Build (2030) Traffic Volumes The anticipated mixed -use center build -out year is 2030. Regional growth was added to the existing traffic volumes to estimate the no -build (2030) traffic volumes. It should be noted that this scenario experienced no volume changes based on the new development plan. The results from the February 2022 TIA were updated based on HCM 6'" methodology. No -Build (2030) traffic volumes can be viewed on Figure 9 in the February TIA. Regional Growth No -build traffic volumes were estimated by increasing the existing traffic volumes to the build -out year using an annual background growth rate of 1.0% applied to all turning movements in the February TIA by RKA. Approved Developments There are no approved developments that were included in this TIA revision, as stated in the February TIA. No -Build (2030) Intersection Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis was performed at the study intersections during the weekday AM and PM peak hour under the no -build conditions. The intersection of U.S. 29 at Gold Eagle Drive / Teel Lane is assumed to be closed for the purpose of this analysis to present comparable results with the future conditions. Capacity analysis results utilizing HCM 6' Edition methodology results are summarized in Table 4. The Synchro and SimTraffic output reports are located the Appendix. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sag Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 7 Table 4: No -Build (2030) Intersection Caoacity Analysis Results Lane r• r Peakril irrn -eeaK -.rr Intersection Lane Storage SimTraffic SimTraffic Group (ft LOS Delay (sec Queue Overall LOS LOS Delay (see) Queue Overall LOS NBT - B 14.4 235 C 27.5 172 U.S. 29 at 1-64 NBR 675 B 13.6 112 B C 32.0 110 B Eastbound Ramp SBU/L 350 C 21.1 260 (13.8 Sec) B 19.2 310 (14.8 Sec) SBT - A 0.1 178 A 0.3 27 EBR - A 9.7 24 B 14.0 32 U.S. 29 at Gold WBR - B 14.0 50 B 10.6 44 Eagle Drive / Teel NBT/R - - - - N/A - - - N/A Lane SBT - - - - - - - SBR 175 - - - - - - All study intersections are expected to operate with acceptable LOS during the no -build conditions. Build (2030) Conditions The original site plan from the February TIA included 475 apartments as the residential component and 290,000 s.f. of general office space, among several other uses. In the updated site plan, these two land uses have been modified: • Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) — Increased by 50 units • Single -Family Detached Housing — Added 60 units • Single -Family Detached Housing — Added 240 units • General Office Space — Decreased by 50,000 s.f. Proposed Site Access The February TIA included a connection to the existing Gold Eagle Drive and one new driveway on U.S. 29 (Monacan Trail). No changes are being proposed to the site access based on the updated site plan. Site Generated Volumes The February 2022 TIA estimated the trip potential of the proposed mixed -use center based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11rh Edition. Table 5 shows the trip generation potential of the updated site plan based on the changes previously described. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 8 Table 5: Site Trip Generation — Tvpical Weekday —11'h Edition Use DailyAverage Traffic PM Peak Hour Code)Land (ITE Land Use Enter Exit Exit Enter Exit Single -Family Detached Housing 60lots 316 316 12 35 38 23 (210) Single -Family Attached Housing 240 lots 889 889 37 82 80 60 (215) Multifamily Housing 525 11229 13229 50 169 125 80 (Mid -Rise) (221) apartments Congregate Care Facility 200 beds 222 222 10 7 18 18 (253) General Office Space 240,000 s.f. 13301 13301 321 44 59 287 (710) Strip Retail Plaza 30,000 s.f. 817 817 42 29 99 99 (<40 ksf) (822) Fast -Casual Restaurants 20,000 s.f. 972 972 14 15 189 154 (930) Convenience Store / Gas Station 5,000 s.f. 1,543 1,543 162 162 136 137 (4-5.5 ksf) (945) 12 f.p. Brewery Tap Room 5,000 s.f. 154 154 3 0 29 20 (971) Subtotal 7,443 7,443 651 543 773 878 ITE Internal Capture — 3% AM / 10% PM -484 -484 -18 -18 -82 -82 Driveway Volumes 63959 63959 633 525 691 796 ITE Pass -By Trips: Strip Retail Plaza —34% -259 -259 -11 -11 -30 -30 Fast Casual Restaurants — 43% -390 -390 -6 -6 -66 -66 Brewery — 43% -61 -61 -0 -0 -9 -9 Convenience Store —76% -13096 -13096 -119 -119 -93 -93 Total Primary Trips 53153 53153 497 389 493 598 February 7 Plan 4,653 4,653 540 285 416 608 Percentage Difference in Primary Trips +11% +7% +6% As shown in Table 5, the proposed mixed -use center is anticipated to generate approximately 886 trips during the weekday AM peak hour, 1,091 trips during the weekday PM peak hour, and 10,306 trips on a typical weekday. The peak hour trips are expected to increase by 7% in the AM peak hour and 6% in the PM peak hour and 11 °% overall daily compared with the trip generation table in the February TIA. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 9 Site Trip Distribution The primary site trip distribution for the proposed mixed -use center is based on existing traffic patterns, surrounding land uses, engineering judgement and input from the County and VDOT. The distribution used in the February TIA is restated below: • 45% to / from the north on U.S. 29 • 35% to / from the east on 1-64 • 10% to / from the west on 1-64 • 10% to / from the south on U.S. 29 The pass -by distribution was based on ADT's and existing traffic volumes, and is restated below from the February TIA: • AM Peak — 30% southbound / 70% northbound • PM Peak — 70% southbound / 30% northbound The primary and pass -by trip distribution are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4 , respectively. The primary and pass -by site trip assignments are shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6 , respectively. The total site trips are shown in Figure 7. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 10 June 21, 2022 Figure 3: Primary Site Trip Distribution 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 11 June 21, 2022 Figure 4: Pass -By Site Trip Distribution 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 12 June 21, 2022 ° 2 a �E 1 m a 3 m 22 o /4-- 349 (346)39 (60) U.S. 4 ~ 99 (98) U.S. 398 (395) U.S. t224 (222) 29 (538) 350—► 29 (329) 214 29 (329) 214—► (209) 136 p a �q 29 (49)49--# Figure 5: Primary Site Trip Assignment OExisting Intersection ® Future Intersection Existing Roadway Future Roadway - Future Right4rMight-out Driveway AM(PM) Peak Hour Site Trip Assignment 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 13 June 21, 2022 Figure 6: Pass -By Site Trip Assignment 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 14 June 21, 2022 ° 2 a �E 1 m a 3 m 22yi7r W O /4-- 1I '� 390 (485) � 39 (60) U.S. Y 58 (Al) U.S. 398 (395) U.S. t224 (222) 29 (538) 350—► 29 (329) 214 29 (329) 214—► (209) 136 O �q a 29 (108)144� (59) -95 —► Figure 7: Total Site Trips OExisting Intersection ® Future Intersection Existing Roadway Future Roadway - Future Right4rMight-out Driveway AM(PM) Peak Hour Site Trip Assignment 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 15 Build (2030) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes The proposed site trips (Figure 7) were added to the no -build 2030 traffic volumes with redirected trips (Figure 9 from the February TIA) to estimate the build 2030 traffic volumes. The build (2030) peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 8. Build (2036) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes The proposed site trips (Figure 7) were added to the no -build traffic 2036 volumes with redirected trips (Figure 10 from the February TIA) to estimate the build 2036 traffic volumes. The build (2030) peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 9. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 16 June 21, 2022 3 m 2 COE816 (487) (1,463)398 ro721 (1,654) /C�;-4 '�551 (1,202) U.S. 505(1,077) U.S. Y(0) U.S. 4-1,186(2,641 29(1,074)1,434—► r* 29 (671)1,002 29 (1,204)2,310—► (33) 18—* m (425) 463 $ N 0 M 29 (108) 144,' (510) 1,007 —� Figure 8: Build (2030) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes OExisting Intersection ® Future Intersection Existing Roadway Future Roadway Future RightinMigkt-out Driveway AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Page 17 June 21, 2022 3 o 2 yu°7 z m 1 m m 22 'Y o 3 � a q - Wj o (7 � L 398 (487) t-842 (1,529) ro v r " '�582 F532 „`765 (1,755) (1,272) U.S. (1,147) U.S. r �5(0) U.S. t-1,245(2,790 29(1,106)1,500—► r* 29 (692) 1,051 29 (1,257)2,440—► (34) 19-r A (437) 483 M � r � mF H� 29 (108) 144,, (543) 1,074 —� Figure 9: Build (2036) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes OExisting Intersection ® Future Intersection Existing Roadway Future Roadway - Future RightinMigkt-out Driveway AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property - TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 18 Build (2030) Intersection Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis was performed at the study intersections during the weekday AM and PM peak hour under build (2030) conditions. SimTrafflc queue lengths provided are based on an average of 10 microsimulation runs, except where the intersection was evaluated as a roundabout. In that case, Sidra queues were used. Those results are summarized in Table 6. The Synchro, SimTraffic and Sidra output reports are included in the Appendix. Table 6: Build 2030 Intersection Caoacitv Anal sis Results Lane Peak Ho�N PM Peak Hour M Intersection Lane Group Storage LOS .- (see) Queue (R) rrall �LOS LOS .- y (see) Queue (ft) Overall L019 NBT - B 14.4 261 C 27.5 192 U.S. 29 at 1-64 NBR 675 B 13.6 138 B C 32.0 102 B Eastbound Ramp SBU/L 350 C 21.1 272 (13.8 Sec) B 19.2 314 (14.8 Sec) SBT - A 0.1 281 A 0.3 193 U.S. 29 at 1-64 NBT - B 10.7 255 C 26.2 194 Eastbound Ramp NBR 675 B 11.3 158 B D 51.0 99 C SBU/L 350 D 45.4 280 (16.3 SeC) D 37.1 320 (24.1 Sec) nth Green 7) SBT A 0.2 326 A 0.4 295 EBR - A 9.7 62 B 14.0 212 U.S. 29 at Gold WBR - B 14.0 67 B 10.6 42 Eagle Drive / Teel NBT/R - - - - N/A - - - N/A Lane SBT - - - - - - - SBR 175 - - - - - - EBL - F 551.6 929 F Err 1,408 U.S. 29 at Site EBR - A 9.9 930 B 13.9 1,422 Driveway NBL NBL 200 A 9.5 80 N/A B 14.7 108 N/A (Unsignalizeap SBT - - _ _ _ _ SBR 200 - - - - - - EBUR - C 16.1 122 F 200.1 1,662 U.S. 29 at Site NBL/T - C 18.6 210 B A 9.4 69 F Driveway NBT - C 17.9 214 (14.5 Sec) A 9.0 70 (56.0 Sec) Roundabout SBT - A 5.7 42 B 10.1 127 SBT/R - A 5.7 42 B 10.0 127 EBUR - D 50.7 275 D 42.5 281 U.S. 29 at Site EBR - D 50.7 255 D 42.5 291 Driveway NBL 200 E 57.2 230 C D 48.6 155 C Conventional NBT - A 7.9 237 (21.7 Sec) A 7.7 124 (24.8 Sec) Signal SBT - B 16.1 171 C 22.5 269 SBR 200 A 5.0 71 A 4.2 77 EBL - D 47.0 522 E 63.8 632 U.S. 29 at Site EBR - B 14.4 32 B 10.4 257 Ddveway NBL 200 E 57.5 217 B E 58.4 152 D Signalized Green NBT - A 0.2 134 (19.7 Sec) A 0.1 21 (50.8 Sec) T SBT - C 27.0 209 E 69.6 392 SBR 200 A 5.0 59 A 3.9 300 The intersection of U.S. 29 at 1-64 Eastbound Ramp is expected to operate at LOS B during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of U.S. 29 at Site Driveway was evaluated with several alternative intersection designs. As seen in Table 6 , the unsignalized intersection is expected to operate with excessive queueing during both peak hours. Therefore, alternative intersection configurations were analyzed. With a roundabout installed at this location, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS B during the AM peak hour and LOS F during the PM peak hour. This is not the recommended configuration because of the excessive queueing on the eastbound approach during the PM peak hour. In addition, U.S. 29 is a high-speed roadway so installing a roundabout could cause a safety concern. If modelled as a conventional traffic signal, then the intersection is expected to operate at LOS C during the AM and PM peak hours. If a Green-T traffic signal was installed at this location, then the intersection would operate at LOS B during the AM peak hour and LOS D during the PM peak hour. This is the recommended intersection configuration, as it allows the northbound approach to remain free -flow, only stopping the southbound approach. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 19 A signal warrant analysis was performed at the intersection of U.S. 29 at Site Driveway. The results are shown in the Signal Warrant Analysis section of this report. Build (2036) Intersection Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis was performed at the study intersections during the weekday AM and PM peak hour under build (2030) conditions with the recommended lane configuration only. Those results are summarized in Table 7. The Synchro and SimTraffic output reports are Included in the Appendix. Table 7: Build (2036) Intersection Capacitv Analvsis Results ���E[Wane EIMLPeak Hour IN PM Peak Hour Intersection Lane Group Storage awai-Traffic Delay SimTraffic LOS (sec Queue (ft) =I (sec) Queue (ft) Overall LOS NBT - B 12.4 263 C 26.6 192 U.S. 29 at 1-64 NBR 675 B 13.5 176 B E 56.8 109 C Eastbound Ramp SBU/L 350 D 45.0 279 (17.3 Sec) D 53.5 317 (31.2 Sec) SBT - A 0.2 314 A 0.4 268 EBR - B 10.9 57 C 21.6 337 U.S. 29 at Gold WBR - C 21.6 86 C 15.3 47 Eagle Drive / Teel NBT/R - - - - N/A - - - N/A Lane SBT - - - - - - - SBR 175 - - - - - - EBL - D 47.0 479 E 73.3 651 U.S. 29 at Site EBR - B 14.4 29 B 10.9 252 Driveway NBL 200 E 57.5 213 B E 58.3 151 E Green T NBT - A 0.3 43 (19.3 Sec) A 0.1 0 (57.0 Sec) SBT - C 27.4 211 E 78.3 355 SBR 200 A 5.0 59 A 3.9 249 Under build conditions, the intersection of U.S. 29 at Eastbound Ramp is expected to operate at LOS B during the AM peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour. With the site driveway modelled as a Green T, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS B during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 20 Access Management Standards VDOT classifies U.S. 29 as Principal Arterial, part of the Arterial Preservation Network (APN). The intersection spacing standards from Table 2-2 of VDOT's Road Design Manual, Appendix F are shown in Table 8. Table 8: Minimum Spacing Standards for Commercial Entrances, Intersections, and Median Crossovers Minimum Spacing (Distance) in Feet Type 3 (Full Design Functional Speed Type 2 Classification (See Note Type 1 (Unsignalizedl Access Type 4 (Partial (Signalized) /Directional Access) 2) Full Crossover) Crossover) <_ 30 mph 1,050 880 440 250 Principal 35 to 45 mph 1.320 1,050 565 305 Arterial > 50 mph 2.640 1.320 750 495 S 30 mph 880 660 355 200 Minor 35 to 45 mph 1,050 660 470 250 Arterial >_ 50 mph 1,320 1.050 555 425 <— 30 mph 660 440 225 200 Collector 35 to 45 mph 660 440 335 250 >— 50 mph 1,050 660 445 360 Local Street See Note 1 TABLE 2.2 MINIMUM SPACING STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ACCESSES, INTERSECTIONS AND MEDIAN CROSSOVERS' Notes to Table 2-2: 1. Local Street Spacing — No commercial entrance shall be allowed within the functional area of an intersection without prior approval from the Engineer at the Residency or District. For commercial entrances on local streets (not individual private entrance driveways to homes), a spacing distance of 50 feet between entrance radii is specified to assure a minimum separation between such entrances (illustrated in Figure 4-1 1)_ No commercial entrance shall be within 115 feet minimum measured from the outer edge of the inscribed circle of a Roundabout, without prior approval from the Engineer at the Residency or District. If an entrance is approved within the 115 feet of the outer edge of the inscribed circle it shall be "Right -In, Right -Out" Only (115' feet minimum is based on the stopping sight distance for 20 mph). The spacing between the proposed right-in/right-out Gold Eagle Drive / Teel Lane is approximately 1,000 feet. VDOT requires a minimum spacing of 425 feet between signalized intersections and partial access intersections. Therefore, no AME was submitted for the Site Driveway. The spacing between the end of the 1-64 Eastbound off -ramp and Gold Eagle Drive / Teel Lane was evaluated based on VDOT's Minimum Spacing Standards for Accesses Near Interchange Areas on Multilane Crossroads. VDOT's minimum spacing standards between interchanges is 1,320 feet for a four -legged intersection, which means the spacing standards are not currently 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum Page 21 June 21, 2022 met. As part of the recommended improvements, the applicant plans to close the median break, converting Gold Eagle Drive and Teel Lane to Right-in/Right-out operations. VDOT's minimum spacing standards between interchanges and right-in/right- out accesses is 750 feet. Therefore, spacing standards will be met as part of the recommended improvements. No AME was submitted for this spacing. Figure 10: Proposed Intersection Spacing 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 22 Signal Warrant Analysis A signal warrant analysis was performed at the intersection of U.S. 29 at Site Driveway under Build (2030) conditions. Signal warrant thresholds include five traffic signal warrants based on traffic volume that are published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): • Warrant 1A — Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume —Minimum Vehicular Volume • Warrant 1 B — Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume — Interruption of Continuous Traffic Flow • Warrant 1 C — Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume — Combination Warrant • Warrant 2 — Four -Hour Vehicular Volume • Warrant 3 — Peak -Hour Vehicular Volume The results of the signal warrant analysis are shown in Table 9 and the detailed signal warrant calculations are included in the appendix. Note that all right-tum volumes were excluded from the analysis to be conservative. Tah10 Q- I nw-Rnrarl Sinnal Warrant Analvsic — 11 R 9Q at Site nrivnwav Start Time 6:00 AM Volume Street 1,126 MinorMajor Offr Street 188 rr Mai r Min Yes 900 75 Min Yes :r Mai r Min Yes r 720 Mai 60 Min Yes Yes 1wi No 7:00 AM 1,438 370 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 8:00 AM 1,637 443 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 9:00 AM 1,193 302 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 10:00 AM 871 292 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 11:00 AM 940 397 Yes No Yes Yes Yes No 12:00 PM1 1,169 466 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 1:00 PM 1,049 394 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 2:00 PM 1,049 386 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 3:00 PM 1,393 398 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 4:00 PM 1,802 525 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 5:00 PM 1,807 591 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 6:00 PM 1,305 331 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 7:00 PM 1,058 236 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Hours Needed to Meet Warrant 8 8 8 8 4 1 Total Hours Met 14 13 14 14 14 11 Warranted? Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Based on the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) low -speed thresholds, all traffic signal warrants are expected to be met at build -out of the site. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 23 Summary and Conclusions The revised site plan generates just 11% more daily trips, 7% more AM peak hour trips and 6% more PM peak hour trips than the February 2022 TIA, and the recommendations are still valid: U.S. 29 at Gold Eagle Drive / Teel Lane • Close the median break on U.S. 29 to convert Gold Eagle Drive and Teel Lane to right -in / right -out operation U.S.29 at Proposed Site Driveway • Construct the site driveway with one ingress lane and two egress lanes • Construct one northbound left-tum lane on U.S. 29 with 200 feet of storage • Construct one southbound right -turn lane on U.S. 29 with 200 feet of storage • Install a Green T traffic signal with northbound U.S. 29 as a free -flow movement • Construct one median acceleration lane on U.S. 29 Figure 11 shows the recommended roadway improvements for build -out. 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property —TIA Addendum June 21, 2022 Page 24 Figure 11: Recommended Lane Configuration 4951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 1 Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com GOROVE SLADE Transportation Planners and Engineers APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX A: Signal Timing Plan APPENDIX B: Existing (2021) Conditions — HCM6th and SimTraffic Output APPENDIX C: No -Build (2030) Conditions — HCM6th and SimTraffic Output APPENDIX D: Build (2030) Conditions — HCM6th, SimTraffic and Sidra Output APPENDIX E: Build (2036) Conditions — HCM6th and SimTraffic Output APPENDIX F: Turn Lane Warrant Analysis — Build (2030) APPENDIX G: VJuST Output and Signal Warrant Calculations 3914 Centreville Road / Suite 330 1 Chantilly, VA 20151 / T 703.787.9595 goroveslade.com Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 2 APPENDIX A: Signal Timing Plan 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Initial Timing Chart �0©©0©000 -PHASE 6 IS ALWAYS GREEN Phasing Diagram 01-6 02-6 (EVP-2) (EVP-3) -PHASE 6 IS ALWAYS GREEN Phasing Diagram 01-6 02-6 (EVP-2) (EVP-3) Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 3 APPENDIX B: Existing (2021) Conditions — HCM6th and SirnTraffic Output 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Existing (2021) Conditions 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations ) ... ++ Traffic Volume (veh/h) 29 1880 872 0 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 29 1880 872 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 31 2022 938 0 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1172 pX, platoon unblocked 1.00 vC, conflicting volume 938 1674 469 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 938 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 736 vCu, unblocked vol 938 1662 469 tC, single (s) 5.5 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.9 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 428 207 541 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 31 674 674 674 469 469 Volume Left 31 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 428 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.28 0.28 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 14.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Existing (2021) Conditions 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour < < I � 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations tt F 9) ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 713 299 4 659 375 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 713 299 4 659 375 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 775 325 4 716 408 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 775 259 0 720 408 Heavy Vehicles (°/u) 2% 2% 6% 6% 2% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 26.9 26.9 0.44 6.5 3.0 2 26.9 20.3 26.9 20.3 0.44 0.33 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 61.6 61.6 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1487 665 1120 3312 v/s Ratio Prot c0.23 c0.21 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.39 0.64 0.12 Uniform Delay, d1 12.7 11.8 17.6 0.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.4 1.3 0.1 Delay (s) 13.0 12.2 18.8 0.1 Level of Service B B B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 12.7 12.1 Approach LOS A B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 61.6 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 100.3% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Existing (2021) Conditions 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *T* 4* A fp A ++ f Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 5 1 243 3 1 978 5 8 11 382 7 Future Vol, veh/h 2 1 1 5 1 243 3 1 978 5 8 11 382 7 Conflicting Peds, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None None - - - None - - - None Storage Length - - - - - 100 - - - 100 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - 0 - - - 0 - - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - 0 - - - 0 - - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 92 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 4 12 2 Mvmt Flow 2 1 1 6 1 276 3 1 1111 6 9 13 434 8 Major/Minor Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1042 1603 217 1384 1608 559 434 442 0 0 1117 1117 0 0 Stage 1 478 478 - 1122 1122 - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 564 1125 - 262 486 - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 6.44 4.14 - - 6.44 4.18 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.52 2.22 - - 2.52 2.24 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 184 105 787 103 104 472 762 1114 - - 279 610 - - Stage 1 537 554 - 219 279 - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 478 278 - 720 549 - - - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 70 95 787 95 94 472 829 829 - - 246 246 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 70 95 - 95 94 - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 534 505 - 218 278 - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 197 277 - 653 500 - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 43.1 27.9 0 1 HCM LOS E D Minor LanelMaior Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLnlWBLnl SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 829 - - 99 431 246 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.046 0.657 0.088 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 43.1 27.9 21.1 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - E D C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 4.6 0.3 - - Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing (2021) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA AM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB NB SB Directions Served L T T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 86 49 94 58 4 Average Queue (ft) 24 2 14 8 0 95th Queue (ft) 71 22 61 39 5 Link Distance (ft) 657 657 657 641 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 275 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) T T R UL L T T 198 205 104 231 253 153 45 107 103 48 133 163 11 2 177 171 82 211 229 72 28 327 327 327 408 408 375 375 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR UL UL Maximum Queue (ft) 28 221 14 34 Average Queue (ft) 4 82 1 7 95th Queue (ft) 19 171 8 24 Link Distance (ft) 840 1049 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing (2021) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA AM Peak Hour Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB Directions Served R Maximum Queue (ft) 2 Average Queue (ft) 0 95th Queue (ft) 3 Link Distance (ft) 257 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 18: Bend Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 29 75 66 Average Queue (ft) 1 4 3 95th Queue (ft) 18 33 27 Link Distance (ft) 108 108 108 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Sum Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 SimTrafic Report GSA Page 2 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Existing (2021) Conditions 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour I ♦ ►ri %-4 Z Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR SEL SER Lane Configurations ►j +++ ++ Traffic Volume (veh/h) 34 764 2210 0 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 34 764 2210 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 37 822 2376 0 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised Raised Median storage veh) 1 1 Upstream signal (ft) 1172 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 2376 2724 1188 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 2376 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 348 vCu, unblocked vol 2376 2724 1188 tC, single (s) 5.5 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 2.9 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 51 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 76 46 181 Direction, Lane # NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 NB 4 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 37 274 274 274 1188 1188 Volume Left 37 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 76 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.49 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.70 0.70 Queue Length 95th (ft) 50 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 90.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F Approach Delay (s) 3.9 0.0 Approach LOS Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Existing (2021) Conditions 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour f- t 1 14 ti l Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations tt r Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 311 197 1 1512 975 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 311 197 1 1512 975 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 338 214 1 1643 1060 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 338 193 0 1644 1060 Heavy Vehicles (°/u) 2% 2% 6% 6% 2% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.8 17.8 42.1 74.3 Effective Green, g (s) 17.8 17.8 42.1 74.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.57 1.00 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 815 365 1926 3312 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.48 0.32 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.53 0.85 0.32 Uniform Delay, d1 23.9 24.6 13.5 0.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.5 3.9 0.3 Delay (s) 24.2 26.1 17.4 0.3 Level of Service C C B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 24.9 10.7 Approach LOS A C B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 74.3 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.7% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group GSA 14.4 C Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Existing (2021) Conditions 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4* 4* Zi tT� A }+ f Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 1 2 2 1 18 1 1 455 6 21 23 977 2 Future Vol, veh/h 14 1 2 2 1 18 1 1 455 6 21 23 977 2 Conflicting Peds, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None None - - - None - - - None Storage Length - - - - - 100 - - - 100 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - 0 - - - 0 - - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - 0 - - - 0 - - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 92 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 4 12 2 Mvmt Flow 16 1 2 2 1 20 1 1 517 7 24 26 1110 2 Major/Minor Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1473 1738 555 1181 1737 262 1110 1112 0 0 524 524 0 0 Stage 1 1210 1210 - 525 525 - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 263 528 - 656 1212 - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 6.44 4.14 - - 6.44 4.18 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.52 2.22 - - 2.52 2.24 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 88 86 475 145 86 737 282 624 - - 668 1025 - - Stage 1 194 254 - 504 528 - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 719 526 - 421 253 - - - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 80 80 475 135 80 737 391 391 - - 805 805 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 80 80 - 135 80 - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 193 238 - 501 525 - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 694 523 - 391 237 - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 56.3 14.4 0.1 0.4 HCM LOS F B Minor LanelMaior Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLnlWBLnl SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 391 - - 89 406 805 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.217 0.059 0.062 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 14.3 - - 56.3 14.4 9.8 - - HCM Lane LOS B - - F B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.8 0.2 0.2 - - Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing (2021) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA PM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served L T T T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 360 632 635 408 661 587 Average Queue (ft) 272 303 241 83 82 37 95th Queue (ft) 445 771 708 447 440 287 Link Distance (ft) 657 657 657 641 641 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 17 15 10 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 44 38 25 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 275 Storage Bilk Time (%) 65 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 168 0 Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (ft) 241 232 78 300 302 31 Average Queue (ft) 101 87 42 199 223 1 95th Queue (ft) 206 196 69 286 293 32 Link Distance (ft) 328 328 328 406 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 4 4 Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 7 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 375 375 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR UL UL Maximum Queue (ft) 52 43 8 38 Average Queue (ft) 13 14 0 10 95th Queue (ft) 41 38 5 29 Link Distance (ft) 840 1049 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100 100 Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report Existing (2021) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA PM Peak Hour Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB B21 NB NB SB Directions Served R T T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 179 331 217 220 2 Average Queue (ft) 29 49 51 50 0 95th Queue (ft) 179 329 258 259 2 Link Distance (ft) 257 689 406 406 657 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 8 5 7 8 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 11 13 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement NB NB NB B16 B16 Directions Served T T T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 141 129 40 52 44 Average Queue (ft) 12 10 2 1 1 95th Queue (ft) 113 109 43 31 32 Link Distance (ft) 401 401 536 536 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 1 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 2 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 450 Storage Bilk Time (%) 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 Intersection: 18: Bend Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 54 109 50 Average Queue (ft) 2 7 3 95th Queue (ft) 30 54 24 Link Distance (ft) 124 124 124 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Sum Network wide Queuing Penalty: 321 SimTratBc Report GSA Page 2 Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 4 APPENDIX C: No -Build (2030) Conditions — HCM6th and SirnTraffic Output 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA No -Build (2030) Conditions 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour f- Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ F Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 780 327 4 721 410 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 780 327 4 721 410 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 848 355 4 784 446 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 52 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 848 303 0 788 446 Heavy Vehicles (°/u) 2% 2% 6% 6% 2% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 31.3 31.3 0.45 6.5 3.0 2 31.3 23.8 31.3 23.8 0.45 0.34 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 69.5 69.5 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1533 686 1164 3312 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 c0.23 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.44 0.68 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 14.0 13.1 19.6 0.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.5 1.6 0.1 Delay (s) 14.4 13.6 21.1 0.1 Level of Service B B C A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 14.2 13.5 Approach LOS A B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.5 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 109.1% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA No -Build (2030) Conditions 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r r +I* tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 2 0 0 31 0 1070 5 0 418 8 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 2 0 0 31 0 1070 5 0 418 8 Conflicting Peds, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 4 12 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 2 0 0 35 0 1216 6 0 475 9 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 238 611 0 0 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.94 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.32 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 763 0 0 437 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 763 - - 437 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.7 14 0 0 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Maior Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 763 437 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.003 0.081 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.7 14 - - HCM Lane LOS - - A B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0.3 - - Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report No -Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA AM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB Directions Served T T T Maximum Queue (it) 111 135 105 Average Queue (ft) 10 37 24 95th Queue (it) 59 109 75 Link Distance (ft) 657 657 657 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (it) 235 225 112 242 260 178 Average Queue (it) 131 126 54 147 176 14 95th Queue (it) 212 203 93 225 245 89 Link Distance (ft) 331 331 331 403 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 375 375 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB Directions Served R R TR Maximum Queue (ft) 24 50 6 Average Queue (ft) 2 19 0 95th Queue (ft) 15 44 6 Link Distance (ft) 840 1049 725 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SaTraffic Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report No -Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA AM Peak Hour Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB NB Directions Served R T Maximum Queue (ft) 11 2 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 95th Queue (ft) 7 2 Link Distance (ft) 257 403 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 18: Bend Movement EB EB Directions Served T Maximum Queue (ft) 36 6 Average Queue (ft) 1 0 95th Queue (ft) 29 0 Link Distance (ft) 229 229 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Sum Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0 SimTraffc Report GSA Page 2 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA No -Build (2030) Conditions 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ r Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 342 216 1 1654 1068 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 342 216 1 1654 1068 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (°/u) 0.92 0 0 0 2% 0.92 0 0 0 2% 0.92 372 0 372 6% 0.92 235 15 220 6% 0.92 1 0 0 2% 0.92 1798 0 1799 3% 0.92 1161 0 1161 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.1 18.1 47.7 80.2 Effective Green, g (s) 18.1 18.1 47.7 80.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.59 1.00 Clearance Time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 768 343 2022 3312 v/s Ratio Prot 0.11 c0.53 0.35 v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.64 0.89 0.35 Uniform Delay, d1 27.0 28.1 14.0 0.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 3.9 5.2 0.3 Delay (s) 27.5 32.0 19.2 0.3 Level of Service C C B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 29.2 11.8 Approach LOS A C B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 14.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.2 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.6% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group GSA 14.4 C Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA No -Build (2030) Conditions 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r r ft +t Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 17 0 0 22 0 536 33 0 1118 2 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 17 0 0 22 0 536 33 0 1118 2 Conflicting Peds, #mr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 4 12 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 19 0 0 25 0 609 38 0 1270 2 Major/Minor Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow Al - - 635 324 0 0 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.94 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.32 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 421 0 0 672 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 421 - - 672 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14 10.6 0 0 HCM LOS B B Minor LanelMaior Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLnl SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 421 672 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.046 0.037 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 14 10.6 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.1 - - Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report No -Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA PM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement SB SB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 659 659 Average Queue (ft) 197 131 95th Queue (ft) 691 561 Link Distance (ft) 641 641 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 2 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (ft) 172 155 110 310 301 27 Average Queue (ft) 96 82 47 211 230 1 95th Queue (ft) 149 138 81 286 287 27 Link Distance (ft) 328 328 328 406 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 375 375 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB Directions Served R R Maximum Queue (ft) 32 44 Average Queue (ft) 13 16 95th Queue (ft) 35 39 Link Distance (ft) 840 1049 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SaTraffic Report GSA Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report No -Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA PM Peak Hour Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement SB SB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 20 18 Average Queue (ft) 1 1 95th Queue (ft) 11 12 Link Distance (ft) 657 657 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 18: Bend Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 58 148 70 Average Queue (ft) 3 21 9 95th Queue (ft) 31 88 44 Link Distance (ft) 94 94 94 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Sum Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2 SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 5 APPENDIX D: Build (2030) Conditions — HCM6th, SirnTraffic and Sidra Output 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ r Al T+ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 1002 463 4 721 816 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 1002 463 4 721 816 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1524 3400 3312 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 1089 503 4 784 887 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 1089 471 0 788 887 Heavy Vehicles (°/u) 2% 2% 6% 6% 2% 3% 9% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 47.2 47.2 0.53 6.5 3.0 2 47.2 27.7 47.2 27.7 0.53 0.31 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 89.3 89.3 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1800 805 1054 3312 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 c0.23 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.60 0.59 0.75 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 14.6 14.4 27.7 0.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 1.1 2.9 0.2 Delay (s) 15.2 15.5 30.6 0.2 Level of Service B B C A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 15.3 14.5 Approach LOS A B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 14.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 89.3 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 115.2% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r r ttf* tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 74 0 0 31 0 1434 18 0 505 398 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 74 0 0 31 0 1434 18 0 505 398 Conflicting Peds, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - - 175 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 12 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 84 0 0 35 0 1630 20 0 574 452 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 287 825 0 0 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.94 7.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.32 3.92 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 710 0 0 271 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 710 - - 271 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.8 20.3 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Maior Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 710 271 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.118 0.13 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.8 20.3 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.4 - - Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour ---* 4\ t 1 -' Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r ++ ++ r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 445 8 144 1007 480 99 Future Volume (Veh/h) 445 8 144 1007 480 99 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 484 9 157 1095 522 108 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised None Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1384 261 630 vC1, stage 1 oonf vol 522 vC2, stage 2 oonf vol 862 vCu, unblocked vol 1384 261 630 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 99 83 cM capacity (veh/h) 229 738 948 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 484 9 157 548 548 261 261 108 Volume Left 484 0 157 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 108 cSH 229 738 948 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 2.12 0.01 0.17 0.32 0.32 0.15 0.15 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 921 1 15 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 551.6 9.9 9.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F A A Approach Delay (s) 541.7 1.2 0.0 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 113.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.2% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) T T T 137 160 139 22 59 46 95 140 114 749 749 749 Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T T Maximum Queue (ft) 254 261 138 257 272 281 199 Average Queue (ft) 145 158 64 169 187 64 18 95th Queue (ft) 242 245 113 237 252 218 111 Link Distance (ft) 337 337 337 280 280 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 1 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 1 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB Directions Served R R T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 62 67 38 36 Average Queue (ft) 29 19 2 2 95th Queue (ft) 52 52 23 27 Link Distance (ft) 841 1007 182 182 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB SB Directions Served L R L R Maximum Queue (ft) 929 930 80 17 Average Queue (ft) 758 584 34 1 95th Queue (ft) 1172 1295 63 9 Link Distance (ft) 891 891 Upstream Blk Time (%) 65 50 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB NB SB Directions Served R T T Maximum Queue (ft) 123 5 28 Average Queue (ft) 15 0 1 95th Queue (ft) 71 5 15 Link Distance (ft) 587 280 749 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend Movement EB EB Directions Served T Maximum Queue (ft) 147 61 Average Queue (ft) 63 15 95th Queue (ft) 138 41 Link Distance (ft) 41 41 Upstream Blk Time (%) 6 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 25 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 22: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served U U Maximum Queue (ft) 14 49 Average Queue (ft) 1 13 95th Queue (ft) 8 38 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 29 SimTraffic Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour f t u ti 1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ F Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 671 425 1 1654 1463 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 671 425 1 1654 1463 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3406 1583 3433 3539 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3406 1583 3433 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 729 462 1 1798 1590 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 729 455 0 1799 1590 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 6% 2% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 28.2 28.2 0.31 6.5 3.0 2 28.2 47.1 28.2 47.1 0.31 0.53 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 89.7 89.7 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1070 497 1802 3539 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.52 0.45 v/s Ratio Perm c0.29 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.92 1.00 0.45 Uniform Delay, d1 26.8 29.6 21.3 0.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.8 21.5 20.6 0.4 Delay (s) 28.6 51.1 41.9 0.4 Level of Service C D D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 37.4 22.4 Approach LOS A D C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 89.7 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report RKA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r r ttf+ }t r Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 204 0 0 22 0 1074 33 0 1077 487 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 204 0 0 22 0 1074 33 0 1077 487 Conflicting Peds, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 4 20 Mvmt Flow 0 0 219 0 0 24 0 1155 35 0 1158 524 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 579 595 0 0 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.94 7.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.32 3.92 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 458 0 0 383 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 458 - - 383 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 19.9 15 0 0 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Maior Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 458 383 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.479 0.062 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 19.9 15 - - HCM Lane LOS - - C C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.5 0.2 - - Synchro 10 Report RKA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour --* -,;v 4\ t 4 -' Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r ►j ft f+ r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 597 12 108 510 1183 98 Future Volume (Veh/h) 597 12 108 510 1183 98 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 649 13 117 554 1286 107 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Raised None Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1797 643 1393 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1286 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 511 vCu, unblocked vol 1797 643 1393 tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.8 tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 97 76 cM capacity (veh/h) 156 416 487 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 NB 1 NB 2 NB 3 SB 1 SB 2 SB 3 Volume Total 649 13 117 277 277 643 643 107 Volume Left 649 0 117 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 107 cSH 156 416 487 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 4.16 0.03 0.24 0.16 0.16 0.38 0.38 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) Err 2 23 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) Err 13.9 14.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS F B B Approach Delay (s) 9802.9 2.6 0.0 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 2381.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.8% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement SB SB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 898 897 Average Queue (ft) 147 124 95th Queue (ft) 693 633 Link Distance (ft) 882 882 Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (ft) 192 182 102 308 314 193 Average Queue (ft) 92 98 46 245 249 11 95th Queue (ft) 162 152 78 304 299 102 Link Distance (ft) 302 302 302 331 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB Directions Served R R T Maximum Queue (ft) 212 42 2 Average Queue (ft) 88 12 0 95th Queue (ft) 171 35 2 Link Distance (ft) 839 1010 297 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB SB Directions Served L R L R Maximum Queue (ft) 1408 1422 108 20 Average Queue (ft) 1365 1291 47 1 95th Queue (ft) 1568 1859 87 11 Link Distance (ft) 1383 1383 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 92 88 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement SB SB SB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend T T T 88 107 106 7 15 15 56 68 70 740 740 740 Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 128 144 31 Average Queue (ft) 6 8 1 95th Queue (ft) 59 68 18 Link Distance (ft) 140 140 140 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 20: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB SB Directions Served U U T Maximum Queue (ft) 12 59 10 Average Queue (ft) 1 21 0 95th Queue (ft) 8 51 11 Link Distance (ft) 1186 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 2 SimTraffic Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour f- 1 " �► Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ r Al T+ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 1002 463 4 721 816 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 1002 463 4 721 816 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 1538 3400 3438 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 1538 3400 3438 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 1089 503 4 784 887 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 1089 479 0 788 887 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 5% 5% 2% 3% 5% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 71.5 71.5 0.60 6.5 3.0 2 71.5 34.1 71.5 34.1 0.60 0.28 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 120.0 120.0 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2048 916 966 3438 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 c0.23 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.52 0.82 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 14.3 14.2 40.0 0.0 Progression Factor 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 2.0 5.4 0.2 Delay (s) 14.6 15.6 45.4 0.2 Level of Service B B D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 14.9 21.5 Approach LOS A B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 18.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 115.2% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour �-, t1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations lM f+ f+ r Traffic Volume (vph) 445 8 144 1007 480 99 Future Volume (vph) 445 8 144 1007 480 99 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3435 1770 3539 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3435 1770 3539 3539 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 484 9 157 1095 522 108 RTOR Reduction (vph) 2 0 0 0 0 31 Lane Grouo Flow (voh) 491 0 157 1095 522 77 Turn Type Prot Prot NA NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 22.9 15.9 85.1 63.2 86.1 Effective Green, g (s) 22.9 15.9 85.1 63.2 86.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.13 0.71 0.53 0.72 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 655 234 2509 1863 1214 vls Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.09 c0.31 0.15 0.01 vls Ratio Perm 0.04 vlc Ratio 0.75 0.67 0.44 0.28 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 45.8 49.6 7.3 15.8 5.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.01 0.99 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.8 7.4 0.6 0.4 0.0 Delay (s) 50.7 57.2 7.9 16.1 5.0 Level of Service D E A B A Approach Delay (s) 50.7 14.0 14.2 Approach LOS D B B Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement INS NB NB Directions Served T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 172 196 171 Average Queue (ft) 49 91 73 95th Queue (ft) 146 179 164 Link Distance (ft) 749 749 749 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T T Maximum Queue (ft) 288 296 135 272 280 324 248 Average Queue (ft) 137 146 60 201 213 117 48 95th Queue (ft) 247 258 108 276 288 316 189 Link Distance (ft) 337 337 337 280 280 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 0 1 2 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 13 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) 0 1 2 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 5 12 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB Directions Served R R T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 64 63 12 19 Average Queue (ft) 31 22 0 1 95th Queue (ft) 54 54 8 7 Link Distance (ft) 841 1020 184 184 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTrafic Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served L LR L T T T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 275 255 230 237 218 171 170 71 Average Queue (ft) 162 147 112 103 110 75 81 17 95th Queue (ft) 245 229 197 193 190 140 145 51 Link Distance (ft) 891 891 1209 1209 480 480 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) 1 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 1 0 Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB SB SB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend 104 169 65 9 13 2 54 82 34 587 749 749 Movement EB EB Directions Served T Maximum Queue (ft) 145 52 Average Queue (ft) 56 13 95th Queue (ft) 134 38 Link Distance (ft) 41 41 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 5 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 21 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement NB Directions Served T Maximum Queue (ft) 6 Average Queue (ft) 0 95th Queue (ft) 5 Link Distance (ft) 441 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 22: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served U U Maximum Queue (ft) 19 56 Average Queue (ft) 1 15 95th Queue (ft) 8 43 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 60 SimTraffc Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Signal 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour f t " Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ F Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 671 425 1 1654 1463 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 671 425 1 1654 1463 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3471 1583 3433 3539 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3471 1583 3433 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 729 462 1 1798 1590 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 729 454 0 1799 1590 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 27.5 27.5 0.31 6.5 3.0 2 27.5 48.1 27.5 48.1 0.31 0.53 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 90.0 90.0 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1060 483 1834 3539 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.52 0.45 v/s Ratio Perm c0.29 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.94 0.98 0.45 Uniform Delay, d1 27.5 30.5 20.5 0.0 Progression Factor 1.14 1.14 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 25.7 16.6 0.4 Delay (s) 34.4 60.5 37.1 0.4 Level of Service C E D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 44.5 19.9 Approach LOS A D B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Signal 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour --,* 4\ t 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations lM ft f+ r Traffic Volume (vph) 597 12 108 510 1183 98 Future Volume (vph) 597 12 108 510 1183 98 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3435 1770 3539 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3435 1770 3539 3539 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 649 13 117 554 1286 107 RTOR Reduction (vph) 2 0 0 0 0 32 Lane Group Flow (vph) 660 0 117 554 1286 75 Turn Type Prot Prot NA NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.3 8.8 57.7 42.9 63.2 Effective Green, g (s) 20.3 8.8 57.7 42.9 63.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.10 0.64 0.48 0.70 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 774 173 2268 1686 1217 vls Ratio Prot c0.19 c0.07 0.16 c0.36 0.01 vls Ratio Perm 0.03 vlc Ratio 0.85 0.68 0.24 0.76 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 33.4 39.2 6.9 19.4 4.2 Progression Factor 1.00 0.98 1.11 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.0 10.0 0.1 3.2 0.0 Delay (s) 42.5 48.6 7.7 22.5 4.2 Level of Service D D A C A Approach Delay (s) 42.5 14.8 21.1 Approach LOS D B C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.1 % ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Signal Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB SB SB Directions Served T T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 7 11 694 781 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 113 129 95th Queue (ft) 4 8 561 602 Link Distance (ft) 740 740 756 756 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 1 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (ft) 218 232 136 305 316 250 Average Queue (ft) 143 153 67 253 256 11 95th Queue (ft) 205 216 110 306 306 105 Link Distance (ft) 302 302 302 331 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB Directions Served R R T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 240 54 5 8 Average Queue (ft) 106 18 0 0 95th Queue (ft) 225 46 5 5 Link Distance (ft) 839 1021 300 300 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Signal Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served L LR L T T T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 281 291 155 104 124 256 269 77 Average Queue (ft) 167 168 73 43 52 158 172 16 95th Queue (ft) 250 261 129 88 103 235 241 56 Link Distance (ft) 754 754 1192 1192 359 359 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) 0 3 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement SB SB SB Directions Served T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 61 107 82 Average Queue (ft) 4 13 10 95th Queue (ft) 35 62 48 Link Distance (ft) 740 740 740 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 96 161 17 Average Queue (ft) 5 14 1 95th Queue (ft) 48 100 9 Link Distance (ft) 140 140 140 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Conventional Signal Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 20: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served U U Maximum Queue (ft) 17 77 Average Queue (ft) 1 25 95th Queue (ft) 9 59 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 6 SimTraffic Report GSA Page 3 LANE SUMMARY ®Site: [U.S. 29 at Site Driveway -AM] Sieg Property -Albemarle County, VA AM Peak hour Build (2030) Conditions Roundabout Lane 1 609 2.0 836 0.729 100 18.6 LOS C 8.3 210.4 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 1251 2.0 0.729 18.2 LOS C 8.4 214.3 North: U.S. 29(SB) Lane 1 313 2.0 1138 0.275 100 5.7 LOSA 1.6 41.8 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 629 2.0 0.275 5.7 LOSA 1.6 41.9 West: Site Driveway (EB) Lane 1° 492 2.0 763 0.646 100 16.1 LOS C 4.8 122.0 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 492 2.0 0.646 16.1 LOS C 4.8 122.0 Intersection 2373 2.0 �O 14.5 LOS B 8.4 214.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay 8 v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. Gap -Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akgelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach SIDRA INTERSECTION 7.0 1 Copyright © 2000-2017 Akoelik and Associates Ply Ltd i sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GSA. I Processed: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 9:48:56 AM Project: Z:130931001.Sieg Property - Albemade County TIAWnalysis\SIDRA\US 29 at Site Driveway.sip7 LANE LEVEL OF SERVICE Lane Level of Service V Site: [U.S. 29 at Site Driveway - Sieg Property - Albemarle County, VA AM Peak hour Build (2030) Conditions Roundabout All Movement Classes South North West Intersection LOS C A C B 1N Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. SIDRA INTERSECTION 7.0 1 Copyright © 2000-2017 Akcelik and Associates Ply Ltd I sidrasolutions.cem Organisation: GSA. I Processed: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 9:48:56 AM Project: Z:t30931001.Sieg Property - Albemade County TIAWnalysis\SIDRA\US 29 at Site Driveway.sip7 LANE SUMMARY ® Site: [U.S. 29 at Site Driveway - PM] Sieg Property -Albemarle County, VA PM Peak hour Build (2030) Conditions Roundabout Lane 1 327 2.0 811 0.403 100 9.4 LOSA 2.7 68.5 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 672 2.0 0.403 North: U.S. 29(SB) Lane 1 694 2.0 1190 0.583 100 Approach 1392 2.0 0.583 West: Site Driveway (EB) - Lane 1° 662 2.0 486 1.363 100 Approach 662 2.0 1.363 Intersection 2726 2.0 1.363 9.2 LOS A 10.1 LOS B 10.0 LOS B 10.0 LOS B 200.1 LOS F 200.1 LOS F 56.0 LOS F 2.8 70.0 5.0 127.2 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 5.0 127.4 65.4 1661.6 Full 1600 0.0 65.4 1661.6 65.4 1661.6 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies Gap -Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akgelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach SIDRA INTERSECTION 7.0 1 Copyright © 2000-2017 Akcalik and Associates Ply Ltd i sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GSA i Processed: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 9:48:55 AM Project: ZA3093\001.Sieg Property - Albemade County TIAWnalysis\SIDRA\US 29 at Site Driveway.sip7 LANE LEVEL OF SERVICE Lane Level of Service V Site: [U.S. 29 at Site Driveway - Sieg Property - Albemarle County, VA PM Peak hour Build (2030) Conditions Roundabout All Movement Classes South North West Intersection LOS A B F F 1N Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). HCM Delay Formula option is used. Control Delay does not include Geometric Delay since Exclude Geometric Delay option applies. SIDRA INTERSECTION 7.0 1 Copyright © 2000-2017 Akcelik and Associates Ply Ltd I sidrasolutions.cem Organisation: GSA. I Processed: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 9:48:55 AM Project: Z:t30931001.Sieg Property - Albemade County TIAWnalysis\SIDRA\US 29 at Site Driveway.sip7 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Green T 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour f- 1 " �► Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ if Al T+ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 1002 463 4 721 816 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 1002 463 4 721 816 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 1538 3400 3438 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 1538 3400 3438 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 1089 503 4 784 887 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 1089 479 0 788 887 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 5% 5% 2% 3% 5% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 71.5 71.5 0.60 6.5 3.0 2 71.5 34.1 71.5 34.1 0.60 0.28 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 120.0 120.0 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2048 916 966 3438 v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 c0.23 0.26 v/s Ratio Perm 0.31 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.52 0.82 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 14.3 14.2 40.0 0.0 Progression Factor 0.68 0.66 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 2.0 5.4 0.2 Delay (s) 10.7 11.3 45.4 0.2 Level of Service B B D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 10.9 21.5 Approach LOS A B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 115.2% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Green T 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour ---* -, t1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r f+ f+ r Traffic Volume (vph) 445 8 144 1007 480 99 Future Volume (vph) 445 8 144 1007 480 99 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 484 9 157 1095 522 108 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 0 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 484 5 157 1095 522 78 Turn Type Prot pt+ov Prot NA NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4! 45 5 Free! 6 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 39.5 61.3 15.8 120.0 46.7 86.2 Effective Green, g (s) 39.5 61.3 15.8 120.0 46.7 86.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.51 0.13 1.00 0.39 0.72 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 582 808 233 3539 1377 1216 vls Ratio Prot c0.27 0.00 c0.09 0.31 c0.15 0.02 vls Ratio Perm 0.03 vlc Ratio 0.83 0.01 0.67 0.31 0.38 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 37.2 14.4 49.6 0.0 26.3 5.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.8 0.0 7.5 0.2 0.8 0.0 Delay (s) 47.0 14.4 57.5 0.2 27.0 5.0 Level of Service D B E A C A Approach Delay (s) 46.4 7.4 23.3 Approach LOS D A C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 19.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) T T T 166 194 168 41 83 61 134 173 136 749 749 749 Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T T Maximum Queue (ft) 239 255 158 272 280 326 266 Average Queue (ft) 126 140 64 207 221 129 57 95th Queue (ft) 218 230 117 282 293 338 209 Link Distance (ft) 337 337 337 280 280 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 2 2 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 18 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 2 2 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 7 17 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB NB Directions Served R R T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 60 60 6 69 68 Average Queue (ft) 30 20 0 5 7 95th Queue (ft) 50 48 5 30 37 Link Distance (ft) 841 1007 182 182 182 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served L R L T T T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 522 32 217 134 19 206 209 59 Average Queue (ft) 267 5 106 8 1 99 105 17 95th Queue (ft) 423 21 185 77 19 175 182 48 Link Distance (ft) 891 891 1203 1203 486 486 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) 1 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 0 1 Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB NB SB SB Directions Served R T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 131 7 294 188 Average Queue (ft) 12 0 26 11 95th Queue (ft) 64 5 150 100 Link Distance (ft) 587 280 749 749 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend Movement EB EB Directions Served T Maximum Queue (ft) 153 64 Average Queue (ft) 69 17 95th Queue (ft) 150 45 Link Distance (ft) 41 41 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 7 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 29 2 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 22: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served U U Maximum Queue (ft) 7 63 Average Queue (ft) 0 17 95th Queue (ft) 6 47 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 83 SimTraffc Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Green T 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour f t u ti Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ if Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 671 425 1 1654 1463 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 671 425 1 1654 1463 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3471 1583 3433 3539 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3471 1583 3433 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 729 462 1 1798 1590 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 729 454 0 1799 1590 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 27.5 27.5 0.31 6.5 3.0 2 27.5 48.1 27.5 48.1 0.31 0.53 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 90.0 90.0 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1060 483 1834 3539 v/s Ratio Prot 0.21 c0.52 0.45 v/s Ratio Perm c0.29 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.94 0.98 0.45 Uniform Delay, d1 27.5 30.5 20.5 0.0 Progression Factor 0.85 0.86 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 24.8 16.6 0.4 Delay (s) 26.2 51.0 37.1 0.4 Level of Service C D D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 35.8 19.9 Approach LOS A D B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.5% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2030) Conditions - Green T 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour --* -';W 4\ t 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r ►j ft f+ r Traffic Volume (vph) 597 12 108 510 1183 98 Future Volume (vph) 597 12 108 510 1183 98 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 649 13 117 554 1286 107 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 3 0 0 0 31 Lane Group Flow (vph) 649 10 117 554 1286 76 Turn Type Prot pt+ov Prot NA NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4! 45 5 Free! 6 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 33.0 46.9 7.9 90.0 31.1 64.1 Effective Green, g (s) 33.0 46.9 7.9 90.0 31.1 64.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.37 0.52 0.09 1.00 0.35 0.71 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 649 824 155 3539 1222 1232 vls Ratio Prot c0.37 0.01 c0.07 0.16 c0.36 0.02 vls Ratio Perm 0.03 vlc Ratio 1.00 0.01 0.75 0.16 1.05 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 28.5 10.4 40.1 0.0 29.4 3.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 35.3 0.0 18.6 0.1 40.1 0.0 Delay (s) 63.8 10.4 58.4 0.1 69.6 3.9 Level of Service E B E A E A Approach Delay (s) 62.8 10.3 64.5 Approach LOS E B E Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 50.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB SB SB Directions Served T T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 5 5 775 698 Average Queue (ft) 0 0 162 96 95th Queue (ft) 6 7 678 515 Link Distance (ft) 740 740 756 756 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 1 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (ft) 194 174 99 309 320 295 Average Queue (ft) 100 112 52 260 263 29 95th Queue (ft) 162 166 83 307 313 180 Link Distance (ft) 302 302 302 331 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 1 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB NB SB SB Directions Served R R T T TR T R Maximum Queue (ft) 316 42 1 3 9 8 15 Average Queue (ft) 132 13 0 0 0 0 1 95th Queue (ft) 273 36 1 3 4 8 11 Link Distance (ft) 839 1010 297 297 297 528 528 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTratBc Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SB SB B15 B15 Directions Served L R L T T T T R T T Maximum Queue (ft) 632 257 152 21 20 374 381 300 4 11 Average Queue (ft) 380 20 69 1 1 244 249 62 0 1 95th Queue (ft) 650 187 130 21 20 355 354 233 5 12 Link Distance (ft) 754 754 1186 1186 365 365 297 297 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 1 0 1 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 7 8 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) 0 0 19 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 19 Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement SB SB SB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend 97 123 105 7 15 13 58 74 64 740 740 740 Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 136 196 20 Average Queue (ft) 7 15 1 95th Queue (ft) 62 100 14 Link Distance (ft) 140 140 140 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 20: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served U U Maximum Queue (ft) 14 76 Average Queue (ft) 1 24 95th Queue (ft) 7 57 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 42 SimTraffc Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 6 APPENDIX E: Build (2036) Conditions — HCM6th and SirnTraffic Output 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2036) Conditions - Green T 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour f- t 1 P ti j Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ if A) ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 1051 483 5 765 842 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 1051 483 5 765 842 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3438 1538 3400 3438 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3438 1538 3400 3438 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 1142 525 5 832 915 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 1142 505 0 837 915 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 5% 5% 2% 3% 5% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 69.9 69.9 0.58 6.5 3.0 2 69.9 35.7 69.9 35.7 0.58 0.30 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 120.0 120.0 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2002 895 1011 3438 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 c0.25 0.27 v/s Ratio Perm 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.56 0.83 0.27 Uniform Delay, d1 15.7 15.6 39.3 0.0 Progression Factor 0.72 0.71 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 2.4 5.7 0.2 Delay (s) 12.4 13.5 45.0 0.2 Level of Service B B D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 12.8 21.6 Approach LOS A B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 121.6% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2036) Conditions - Green T 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations r r ttf* }t r Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 74 0 0 34 0 1500 19 0 532 398 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 74 0 0 34 0 1500 19 0 532 398 Conflicting Peds, Whr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - - 175 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 12 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 84 0 0 39 0 1705 22 0 605 452 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 303 864 0 0 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - Critical Hdwy - - 6.94 7.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - 3.32 3.92 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 693 0 0 255 0 - - 0 - - Stage 1 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Stage 2 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 693 - - 255 - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10.9 21.6 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Maior Mvmt NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 693 255 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.121 0.152 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.9 21.6 - - HCM Lane LOS - - B C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.5 - - Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2036) Conditions - Green T 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour ---* -, t1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r f+ f+ r Traffic Volume (vph) 445 8 144 1074 507 99 Future Volume (vph) 445 8 144 1074 507 99 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 484 9 157 1167 551 108 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 0 30 Lane Group Flow (vph) 484 5 157 1167 551 78 Turn Type Prot pt+ov Prot NA NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4! 45 5 Free! 6 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 39.5 61.3 15.8 120.0 46.7 86.2 Effective Green, g (s) 39.5 61.3 15.8 120.0 46.7 86.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.51 0.13 1.00 0.39 0.72 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 582 808 233 3539 1377 1216 vls Ratio Prot c0.27 0.00 c0.09 0.33 c0.16 0.02 vls Ratio Perm 0.03 vlc Ratio 0.83 0.01 0.67 0.33 0.40 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 37.2 14.4 49.6 0.0 26.5 5.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.8 0.0 7.5 0.3 0.9 0.0 Delay (s) 47.0 14.4 57.5 0.3 27.4 5.0 Level of Service D B E A C A Approach Delay (s) 46.4 7.0 23.7 Approach LOS D A C Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 19.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) T T T 166 194 168 41 83 61 134 173 136 749 749 749 Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T T Maximum Queue (ft) 239 255 158 272 280 326 266 Average Queue (ft) 126 140 64 207 221 129 57 95th Queue (ft) 218 230 117 282 293 338 209 Link Distance (ft) 337 337 337 280 280 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 2 2 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 18 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Blk Time (%) 0 2 2 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 7 17 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB NB Directions Served R R T T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 60 60 6 69 68 Average Queue (ft) 30 20 0 5 7 95th Queue (ft) 50 48 5 30 37 Link Distance (ft) 841 1007 182 182 182 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffc Report GSA Page 1 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served L R L T T T T R Maximum Queue (ft) 522 32 217 134 19 206 209 59 Average Queue (ft) 267 5 106 8 1 99 105 17 95th Queue (ft) 423 21 185 77 19 175 182 48 Link Distance (ft) 891 891 1203 1203 486 486 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) 1 0 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 0 1 Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement WB NB SB SB Directions Served R T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 131 7 294 188 Average Queue (ft) 12 0 26 11 95th Queue (ft) 64 5 150 100 Link Distance (ft) 587 280 749 749 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend Movement EB EB Directions Served T Maximum Queue (ft) 153 64 Average Queue (ft) 69 17 95th Queue (ft) 150 45 Link Distance (ft) 41 41 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 7 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 29 2 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Build (2030) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 22: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served U U Maximum Queue (ft) 7 63 Average Queue (ft) 0 17 95th Queue (ft) 6 47 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 83 SimTraffc Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2036) Conditions - Green T 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Ramp Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour f- 1 ip u ti Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT Lane Configurations ++ if Al ++ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 692 437 1 1755 1529 Future Volume (vph) 0 0 692 437 1 1755 1529 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.5 6.5 7.9 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 Fit Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3471 1583 3433 3539 Fit Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3471 1583 3433 3539 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 752 475 1 1908 1662 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 752 469 0 1909 1662 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 Free Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) 27.5 27.5 0.31 6.5 3.0 2 27.5 48.1 27.5 48.1 0.31 0.53 6.5 7.9 3.0 3.0 90.0 90.0 1.00 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1060 483 1834 3539 v/s Ratio Prot 0.22 c0.56 0.47 v/s Ratio Perm c0.30 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.97 1.04 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 27.7 30.9 20.9 0.0 Progression Factor 0.84 0.86 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.2 30.4 32.5 0.4 Delay (s) 26.6 56.8 53.5 0.4 Level of Service C E D A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 38.3 28.8 Approach LOS A D C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 89.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2036) Conditions - Green T 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 111 if ++I* TT r Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 205 0 0 23 0 1106 34 0 1147 487 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 205 0 0 23 0 1106 34 0 1147 487 Conflicting Peds, #mr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None None Storage Length - - 0 - - 0 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 4 20 Mvmt Flow 0 0 220 0 0 25 0 1189 37 0 1233 524 Maior/Minor Minor2 Conflicting Flow Al - Stage 1 - Stage 2 - Critical Hdwy - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - Follow-up Hdwy - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 Stage 1 0 Stage 2 0 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - Stage 1 - Stage 2 - Minorl Majorl 617 613 0 0 6.94 7.14 3.32 3.92 0 433 0 0 373 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 433 _ _ 373 _ _ Approach EB WB NB SIB HCM Control Delay, s 21.6 15.3 0 0 HCM LOS C C Minor LanelMaior Mvmt NBT NBR EBLnlWBLnl SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) - - 433 373 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.509 0.066 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 21.6 15.3 - - HCM Lane LOS - - C C - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.8 0.2 - - 0 Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 1 Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Build (2036) Conditions - Green T 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour --* -';W 4\ t 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r ►j ft f+ r Traffic Volume (vph) 597 12 108 543 1254 98 Future Volume (vph) 597 12 108 543 1254 98 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3539 1583 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 649 13 117 590 1363 107 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 2 0 0 0 31 Lane Group Flow (vph) 649 11 117 590 1363 76 Turn Type Prot pt+ov Prot NA NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4! 45 5 Free! 6 4 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 32.0 45.9 7.9 90.0 32.1 64.1 Effective Green, g (s) 32.0 45.9 7.9 90.0 32.1 64.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.51 0.09 1.00 0.36 0.71 Clearance Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 629 807 155 3539 1262 1232 vls Ratio Prot c0.37 0.01 c0.07 0.17 c0.39 0.02 vls Ratio Perm 0.03 vlc Ratio 1.03 0.01 0.75 0.17 1.08 0.06 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 10.9 40.1 0.0 28.9 3.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 44.3 0.0 18.6 0.1 49.3 0.0 Delay (s) 73.3 10.9 58.3 0.1 78.3 3.9 Level of Service E B E A E A Approach Delay (s) 72.1 9.7 72.9 Approach LOS E A E Intersection Summa HCM 2000 Control Delay 57.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.02 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group Synchro 10 Report GSA Page 2 Build (2036) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 1: U.S. 29 & Westbound Ramp Movement NB SB SB Directions Served T T T Maximum Queue (ft) 3 773 776 Average Queue (ft) 0 134 134 95th Queue (ft) 3 615 612 Link Distance (ft) 740 756 756 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 1 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 2: U.S. 29 & Eastbound Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served T T R UL L T Maximum Queue (ft) 177 192 109 312 317 268 Average Queue (ft) 105 117 55 261 264 20 95th Queue (ft) 162 174 91 301 307 145 Link Distance (ft) 302 302 302 331 Upstream Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 Storage Bilk Time (°/u) 0 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 1 Intersection: 3: U.S. 29 & Gold Eagle Drive/Teel Lane Movement EB WB NB NB Directions Served R R T TR Maximum Queue (ft) 337 47 6 12 Average Queue (ft) 128 15 0 0 95th Queue (ft) 272 39 6 5 Link Distance (ft) 839 1010 297 297 Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SaTraffic Report GSA Page 1 Build (2036) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 4: U.S. 29 & Site Driveway Movement EB EB NB SB SB SB B15 Directions Served L R L T T R T Maximum Queue (ft) 651 252 151 349 347 249 6 Average Queue (ft) 396 87 73 230 237 35 0 95th Queue (ft) 702 478 131 332 327 158 7 Link Distance (ft) 754 754 365 365 297 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 10 7 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 1 1 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 Storage Bilk Time (%) 0 17 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 17 Intersection: 9: U.S. 29 Movement SB SB SB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 10: Bend 101 96 85 5 11 10 51 57 49 740 740 740 Movement EB EB EB Directions Served T T Maximum Queue (ft) 135 224 31 Average Queue (ft) 7 19 1 95th Queue (ft) 62 115 16 Link Distance (ft) 140 140 140 Upstream Bilk Time (%) 0 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Bilk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) SimTraffic Report GSA Page 2 Build (2036) Conditions - Green T Sieg Property - Albemarle, VA Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak Hour Intersection: 12: U.S. 29 Movement Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) Average Queue (ft) 95th Queue (ft) Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 20: U.S. 29 & Median Break Movement NB SB Directions Served Maximum Queue (ft) 10 63 Average Queue (ft) 1 21 95th Queue (ft) 8 53 Link Distance (ft) Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 125 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Network Summary Network wide Queuing Penalty: 25 SimTraffc Report GSA Page 3 Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 7 APPENDIX F: Turn Lane Warrant Analysis — Build (2030) 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com Slag Property —TIA Addendum Gorove/Slade Associates Four -Lane Highways Based on NCHRP Report 2791 VDOT RDM Appendix F "Intersection Channelization Guide" Background: Warrants for right-tum storage lanes on four -lane highways at unsignalized intersections are based on Figure 3-27 in Appendix F at the Virginia Department of Transportation's (VDOT) Road Design Manual (RDM). This figure provides a graphical representation for determining the necessity of a right turn lane and / or taper by comparing the total volumes of a given approach with their respective right turn volumes. Right Turn Lane Warrant for 4-Lane Highways (VDOTRDM Appendix F Figure 3-27) 120 US 9at Site Drivewe -B 2030 100 AM PM Fu1-vAd h Tum I. ane and raper so uiad a 40 arftawww ulnd 20 Not artam 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 PHF Approach Total, Vehicles Per Hour Sieg Property —TIA Addendum Gorove/Slade Associates Four -Lane Highways Background: Warrants for left -turn storage lanes on four -lane highways at unsignalized intersections are based on Figure 3-3 in Appendix F of the Virginia Department of Transportation's (VDOn Road Design Manual (RDM). The figure provides a graphical representation for determining the necessity of a eftturn lane for divided and undived roadway conditions by comparing the lefttuming volumes of a given approach and the respective opposing traffic volume. 1800 1600 1400 1200 r a 4000 m E >0800 w c o600 a a O 400 200 0 N VDOT Road Design Manual Figure 3-3 (Left Turn Warrant for 4 Lane Highways site PM \ �\ S 29 at Site Driveway - B 2030 AM 1 \` 100 S` S. _�0O Sol 200 300 400 Left Turning Volume (vph) At -Grade, Unsignalized Intersections S = Storage Length W1 0 .lr Sieg Property — TIA Addendum June 2022 Page 8 APPENDIX G: VJuST Output and Signal Warrant Calculations 2951 Lake Brook Drive / Suite 250 / Glen Allen, VA 23060 1 T 804.362.0578 goroveslade.com VDOT Junction Screening Tool onsommoPossible Configurations Indicate with a "y" or "N" if each intersection or interchange configuration should or should not be considered. Use the information links for guidance. Then, click the "Show/Hide Configurations button" to hide the worksheets for the configurations that will not be considered. # Intersections Information Consider? Justification Signalized Intersections 1 Conventional - y 2 Bowtie Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 3 Center Turn Overpass Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 4 Continuous Green-T Link y 5 Echelon Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 6 Full Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 7 Median U-Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 8 Partial Displaced Left Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 9 Partial Median U-Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 10 Quadrant Roadway WE Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 11 Quadrant Roadway N-W Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 12 Quadrant Roadway S-E Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 13 Quadrant Roadway S-W Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 14 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 15 Single Loop Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 16 Split Intersection Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type Unsignalized Intersections 17 50 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 18 75 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 19 Roundabout Link y 20 Two -Way Stop Control y # Interchanges Information Consider? Justification 21 Traditional Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 22 Contraftow Left Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 23 Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 24 Diverging Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 25 Double Roundabout Link N INot feasible for roadway facility type 26 Michigan Urban Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 27 Partial Cloverleaf Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 28 Single Point Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 29 Sin Is Roundabout Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type VDOT Junction Screening Tool Directional Questions and Base lane Configurations Before entering a base number of through lanes for each direction, answer all applicable directional question for each intersection or interchange configuration selected for consideration. Navigate to the lane con fi uration worksheet for example diagrams, if provided. Intersections Question Direction Bowtie N/A N/A Continuous Green-7 Select the direction associated with the "stem" of the T- intersection from the drop -down list. See example diagrams. EB Echelon N/A N/A Median U-Turn N/A N/A Partial Displaced Left Turn N/A N/A Partial Median U-Turn N/A N/A Restricted Crossing U-Turn N/A N/A Single Loop N/A N/A Split Intersection N/A N/A Interchanges Question Direction All N/A NB-SB Enter a base number of through lanes for each direction. The number of through lanes entered will populate on each non -roundabout lane configuration worksheet. This tool also allows the user to enter th number of through lanes on the lane configuration worksheets directly. This base number may be overwritten on individual lane configuration worksheets. Turn lanes, shared lanes, and channelized lanes must still be entered in each lane configuration worksheet. Intersection poe5 e5i eaa C.°c Qea yak Notes Type Maxim Accommodation Weighted T.Oto11 Conventional Conventional - 0.80 48 Continuous Green-T 0.55 12' Roundabout - 0.74 8 Two -Way Stop Control - 1.74 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four -legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. VDOT 28 Information Congestion The maximum v/c ratio represents the worst v/c of all zones that makeup an intersection. Compares the potential of each design to accommodate pedestrians based on safety, wayfinding, and delay. Potential is Pedestrian qualitatively defined as better (+), similar (blank cell), or worse(-) than a conventional intersection or traditional diamond interchange. Safety Weighted Total= (2xCrossing Conflicts)+ Merging Conflicts+ Diverging Conflicts VDOT 29 Conventional nb"'e'^^ -A&B ,VAAM 1GWBIWx '°aN= SPOOrMwaY N: US A 0.80 Jbe fA 30II N W+E s O.BO V/C Safety - Conflict Point • oivs�it o M.gly o c.e..rq oiwgi�y ee�ma c—ine Conventional 7r.t,helane ionsinthe mns. Vol 245 NS Spli�i FP1�1[ �14 �E L ` ne 2one5 m aN aN aN hir► Conflict Point F— voortuxawxsaaxrgfooE vu Continuous Green-T Intersection Ma91p1YlOgE9eLn 14: Sge uvwwayowl I NS ..mx.: US ie a.De +x zozz wnu E ee ws ss N+S'J - a�mw Wxernm ll :l! I Zone 5 Continuous .Q reen Movement M r rvrc vrD xw:TNaaMg,,maoa�mgettllezttual x,.�mgwratiunefm.i,maYm� Safety - Conflict Point Diagram • Di..,�me a MGe ranittryre rnxw Goni�'g 3 n e Mergi�y 3 xToraing -� T 9 [pMittType WeyNl Croni�g 1 rvmgi�g Rv-h 1 12 Continuous Green-T Intersection -a lNFLYEMDLONFIGYRATNNI Steel: EMertNelane mnfigurationzin Me en:t mn:. EA 1p�lt' FALSE ES Sp u[ M^orem'¢rvnK�GNeen SBC,Itic,IV,l s" d 2one5 5 NB " aoo�ivoi SB gsa 5E sa- o<�x o<�x h t r+ EB ElCr VDOrDMO1W SQHXmG,01 xr„ SB dI ®® o� is �0 a DOS EQUATION: A z ezp(-B x Q) �+aoo ooeo ooem ©oom aoc�mm 1—.7T Vftys pCMml(�) I C7 T vftvs pc 'l*m1 IC7T Vftrs pC..lICI I .��. oomooam a_e mmw o ©® ONE -e�0 VDOT 25 VDOT Junction Screening Tool onsommoPossible Configurations Indicate with a "y" or "N" if each intersection or interchange configuration should or should not be considered. Use the information links for guidance. Then, click the "Show/Hide Configurations button" to hide the worksheets for the configurations that will not be considered. # Intersections Information Consider? Justification Signalized Intersections 1 Conventional - y 2 Bowtie Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 3 Center Turn Overpass Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 4 Continuous Green-T Link y 5 Echelon Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 6 Full Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 7 Median U-Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 8 Partial Displaced Left Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 9 Partial Median U-Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 10 Quadrant Roadway WE Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 11 Quadrant Roadway N-W Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 12 Quadrant Roadway S-E Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 13 Quadrant Roadway S-W Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 14 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 15 Single Loop Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 16 Split Intersection Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type Unsignalized Intersections 17 50 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 18 75 Mini Roundabout Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 19 Roundabout Link y 20 Two -Way Stop Control y # Interchanges Information Consider? Justification 21 Traditional Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 22 Contraftow Left Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 23 Displaced Left Turn Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 24 Diverging Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 25 Double Roundabout Link N INot feasible for roadway facility type 26 Michigan Urban Diamond Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 27 Partial Cloverleaf Link N Not feasible for roadway facility type 28 Single Point Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type 29 Sin Is Roundabout Link N Notfeasible for roadway facility type VDOT 26 VDOT Junction Screening Tool Directional Questions and Base lane Configurations Before entering a base number of through lanes for each direction, answer all applicable directional question for each intersection or interchange configuration selected for consideration. Navigate to the lane con fi uration worksheet for example diagrams, if provided. Intersections Question Direction Bowtie N/A N/A Continuous Green-7 Select the direction associated with the "stem" of the T- intersection from the drop -down list. See example diagrams. EB Echelon N/A N/A Median U-Turn N/A N/A Partial Displaced Left Turn N/A N/A Partial Median U-Turn N/A N/A Restricted Crossing U-Turn N/A N/A Single Loop N/A N/A Split Intersection N/A N/A Interchanges Question Direction All N/A NB-SB Enter a base number of through lanes for each direction. The number of through lanes entered will populate on each non -roundabout lane configuration worksheet. This tool also allows the user to enter th number of through lanes on the lane configuration worksheets directly. This base number may be overwritten on individual lane configuration worksheets. Turn lanes, shared lanes, and channelized lanes must still be entered in each lane configuration worksheet. VDOT 27 Intersection poe5 e5i eaa C.°c Qea yak Notes Maximum Accommodation Weighted Tot qj Type Dir V/C Compared to Conventional Con ct Pointisff Conventional - 0.96 48 Continuous Green-T - 0.85 12' Roundabout - 1.22 8 Two -Way Stop Control - 3.33 48 *The continuous green-T is the only three-legged innovative intersection in this tool. To compare the continuous green-T to other innovative intersections, conflicts corresponding with the fourth leg must be removed. This has been done for the conventional intersection. Conflict point diagrams for three-legged and four -legged conventional intersections have been provided on the conventional intersection worksheet for reference. VDOT 28 Information Congestion The maximum v/c ratio represents the worst v/c of all zones that makeup an intersection. Compares the potential of each design to accommodate pedestrians based on safety, wayfinding, and delay. Potential is Pedestrian qualitatively defined as better (+), similar (blank cell), or worse(-) than a conventional intersection or traditional diamond interchange. Safety Weighted Total= (2xCrossing Conflicts)+ Merging Conflicts+ Diverging Conflicts VDOT 29 Conventional wgsr..: -AgNmVb .VA PM GMOI1rro VYuro iw xnN: f(p (hyap9gy Ym-rAY rwiN: US ie vaarercwan 0.% N W+E s 0.98 V/C Safety - Conflict Point • oi>a�ir o Cm o c.e..rq oiw9i•9 14Rm9 c—ine Conventional En[ rEhe lane mnfigurati.nsMthe gur mn:. [Irzl Vul 6W NS Spli�i FPI�I[ �14 Es ClIt"I V,IJ �: zees s " . �se aN aN aN hir► Conflict Point F— voor /uxc9wx saaxrg Son N.14 Continuous Green-T Intersection Ma91p1YIDgE0DV8 n4sx.::.: -Aea/ .VAPM —14:1 Sge ome .. 14: US ie _ Jwe to = 0.55 �ws E ee se N+S 1 W NB ��,Nrv�aa`a�.`amNm I:I :l! I Zone 5 Continuous 1360 ` reen Movement A06 V/C t V/C NOY:TNxtlupamdc Mrefletl AeatlwlUrexvilryretionoftlreirnerssman Safety - Conflict Point Diagram • Di..,�me ranittryre En.w a MGe Gossixg 3 n e Mergi�y 3 NToraing T � - 9 [pMittType WgNI Croni�g 1 NYrphg rvmgixg 1 12 Continuous Green-T Intersection -a lNFLYEMDLONFIGYRATNNI Steel: EntertNelane mnfigurationzin Me en:t mn:. EA 1p�lt' CMn[inuo�GVren�� :a a of J s" Zones ii ! NB r� ��gaiyoi $B y9 1360 @ Z sa=- h t r+ EB VDOrDMO1W SQHXgIG,O1 Nr„ Roundabout iIIIi SaMy- DnnOkt Pat Diagram � Rountlabout '.,n. .s xw.ummncuxamx Ss Roundabout m pyi :yam ■ ■ oMA. . - �g xg 1—.7T Vfty amp MmlI ) I C7 TAW%amp c lRM1 IC7 T..aemvampc -'( p ) I 0 _'"' v ._e... FM FM 6® Project: Sieg Property -Albemarle County, VA Date: 13-Jun-22 Existing 2021 Counts EB (Site Driveway) N/A NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 700 0 0 300 0 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 800 0 0 352 0 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 834 0 0 379 0 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 600 0 0 360 0 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 450 0 0 300 0 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 300 0 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 0 450 0 13:00 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 400 0 14:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 0 0 500 0 15:00 0 0LO00 0 0 0 0 425 0 0 750 0 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 453 0 0 949 0 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 463 0 0 832 0 18:00 0 0 go 0 0 0 0 320 0 0 700 0 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 600 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,295 0 0 7,172 0 1 nu4 No -Build (2030) Volumes EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Th ru Right 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 766 0 0 328 0 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 875 0 0 385 0 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 912 0 0 415 0 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 656 0 0 394 0 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 492 0 0 328 0 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 547 0 0 328 0 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 602 0 0 492 0 13:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 547 0 0 437 0 14:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 437 0 0 547 0 15:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 465 0 0 820 0 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 495 0 0 1038 0 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 506 0 0 910 0 18:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 350 0 0 766 0 19:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 328 0 0 656 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7978 0 0 78" 0 DevelopmentApproved : (Site Driveway) Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approved Development Distribution EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 Total -- -- -- -- -- -- Approved Development Assignment EB (Site Driveway) N/A NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 0 0LO00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 go 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Distribution of Site Traffic EB (Site Driveway) N/A NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 7:00 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 8:00 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 9:00 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 10:00 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 11:00 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 1 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 12:00 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 13:00 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 14:00 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 15:00 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 16:00 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 17:00 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 18:00 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 19:00 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% Total 0.87 0.87 0.37 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Primary Trip Distribution EB (Site Driveway) N/A NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Th ru Right 6:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 7:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 8:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 9:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 10:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 11:00 90% 2.0% 1 10% 8% 20% 12:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 13:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 14:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 15:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 16:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 17:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 18:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% 19:00 90% 2.0% 10% 8% 20% Total Primary Trip Assignment EB (Site Driveway) N/A NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 139 0 3 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 12 31 7:00 246 0 5 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 22 55 8:00 249 0 6 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 22 55 9:00 201 0 4 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 18 45 10:00 215 0 5 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 19 48 11:00 327 0 7 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 29 73 12:00 378 0 8 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 34 84 13:00 325 0 7 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 29 72 14:00 323 0 7 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 29 72 15:00 328 0 7 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 29 73 16:00 402 0 9 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 36 89 17:00 423 0 9 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 38 94 18:00 262 0 6 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 23 58 19:00 201 0 4 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 18 45 Total 4,019 0 89 0 0 0 447 0 0 0 357 893 Pass -By Trip Distribution EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 60% 60% -60% 7:00 65% 65% -65% 8:00 70% 70% -70% 9:00 65% 65% -65% 10:00 60% 60% -60% 11:00 55% 1 55% -55% 12:00 60% 60% -60% 13:00 55% 55% -55% 14:00 50% 50% -50% 15:00 40% 40% -40% 16:00 35% 35% -35% 17:00 30% 30% -30% 18:00 25% 25% -25% 19:00 30% 30% -30% Total Pass -By Assignment EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 32 0 0 0 0 0 32 -32 0 0 0 0 7:00 62 0 0 0 0 0 62 -62 0 0 0 0 8:00 68 0 0 0 0 0 68 -68 0 0 0 0 9:00 51 0 0 0 0 0 51 -51 0 0 0 0 10:00 50 0 0 0 0 0 50 -50 0 0 0 0 11:00 70 0 0 0 0 0 70 -70 0 0 0 0 12:00 88 0 0 0 0 0 88 -88 0 0 0 0 13:00 70 0 0 0 0 0 70 -70 0 0 0 0 14:00 63 0 0 0 0 0 63 -63 0 0 0 0 15:00 51 0 0 0 0 0 51 -51 0 0 0 0 16:00 55 0 0 0 0 0 55 -55 0 0 0 0 17:00 49 0 0 0 0 0 49 -49 0 0 0 0 18:00 26 0 0 0 0 0 26 -26 0 0 0 0 19:00 24 0 0 0 0 0 24 -24 0 0 0 0 Total 759 0 0 0 0 0 759 -759 0 0 0 0 Total Site Trips EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 171 0 3 0 0 0 48 -32 0 0 12 31 7:00 308 0 5 0 0 0 90 -62 0 0 22 55 8:00 317 0 6 0 0 0 96 -68 0 0 22 55 9:00 251 0 4 0 0 0 73 -51 0 0 18 45 10:00 266 0 5 0 0 0 74 -50 0 0 19 48 11:00 397 0 7 0 0 0 106 -70 0 0 29 73 12:00 466 0 8 0 0 0 130 -88 0 0 34 84 13:00 394 0 7 0 0 0 106 -70 0 0 29 72 14:00M 7 0 0 0 99 -63 0 0 29 72 15:007 0 0 0 88 -51 0 0 29 73 16:009 000 99 -55 0 0 36 89 17:009 0 0 0 96 -49 0 0 38 94 8:006 0 0 0 55 -26 0 0 23 58 19:004 0 0 0 46 -24 0 0 18 45 Total 4,777 0 89 0 0 0 1,205 -759 0 0 357 893 Directional Distribution Factor to Match TIA Figure EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 1.10 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 7:00 1.20 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.40 8:00 1.40 1.00 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.80 9:00 1.20 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.40 10:00 1.10 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 11:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 12:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 13:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 14:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 15:00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 16:00 1.15 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.15 1.00 17:00 1.25 1.00 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 18:00 1.15 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.15 1. 10 19:00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 Total Build 2030 Volumes EB (Site Driveway) NIA NB (U.S. 29) SB (U.S. 29) Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 6:00 188 0 3 0 0 0 53 733 0 0 340 37 7:00 370 0 7 0 0 0 116 894 0 0 427 77 8:00 443 0 8 0 0 0 143 1,013 0 0 480 100 9:00 302 0 5 0 0 0 95 666 0 0 432 62 10:00 292 0 5 0 0 0 82 442 0 0 347 57 11:00 397 0 7 0 0 0 1 106 477 0 0 357 73 12:00 466 0 8 0 0 0 130 513 0 0 526 84 13:00 394 0 7 0 0 0 106 477 0 0 466 72 14:00 386 0 7 0 0 0 99 374 0 0 576 72 15:00 398 0 7 0 0 0 88 414 0 0 892 73 16:00 525 0 10 0 0 0 104 463 0 0 1,235 89 17:00 591 0 11 0 0 0 106 516 0 0 1,184 94 18:00 331 0 6 0 0 0 57 341 0 0 907 58 19:00 236 0 4 0 0 0 46 305 0 0 708 45 Total 5,320 0 98 0 0 0 1,331 7,628 0 0 8,878 993 Start Time LUC 710 LUC 822 (820) LUC 930 LUC 945 LUC 971 (970) LUC 210 LUC 215 (210) LUC 221 LUC 253 (254) Weighted Average 6:00 2.2 0.5 0.2 5.5 0.2 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.5 0.030 7:00 7.0 1.5 0.3 6.0 1.5 6.7 6.7 7.5 9.3 0.053 8:00 8.8 2.5 0.6 6.0 2.4 6.2 6.2 6.2 5.2 0.054 9:00 5.4 4.5 0.7 5.5 2.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 6.8 0.043 10:00 5.9 6.5 1.0 5.4 4.1 4.8 4.8 3.7 6.0 0.046 11:00 8.4 9.0 11.4 5.3 8.1 5.2 5.2 4.5 8.3 0.070 12:00 10.4 10.0 13.9 5.9 10.4 5.5 5.5 4.7 10.4 0.081 13:00 8.2 9.0 9.1 5.6 12.7 6.0 6.0 4.4 9.1 0.070 14:00 7.5 9.0 6.7 6.1 16.3 6.6 6.6 5.4 8.0 0.070 15:00 7.4 9.0 5.7 6.6 15.5 7.2 7.2 5.8 7.9 0.071 16:00 10.1 9.5 7.9 6.8 15.4 9.0 9.0 8.3 8.8 0.087 17:00 10.4 9.0 11.0 1 6.8 8.1 8.8 8.8 10.1 7.1 0.091 18:00 2.4 7.5 11.9 6.1 1.9 0.9 0.9 7.9 3.6 0.057 19:00 1.7 5.5 9.2 4.9 0.5 0.9 0.9 6.3 0.8 0.043 Total 95.8 93.0 89.6 82.5 99.4 75.9 75.9 83.1 94.8 0.867 (xxx) = LUC used