The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About37-02 Home Depot Import Distribution Center - Shawnee - BackfilePlease note The site plans associated with this file are located in the library. SITE PLAN CHECKUST The checklist below indicates all the information that needs to be submitted as part of the site plan application_ All required information must be submitted prior to the final approval of any site plan. The Department of Planning and Development will review the application to ensure that it is complete. If any portion is not included or complete, the site plan application will not be accepted and returned to the applicant(s). Site Plan Package 1. One set of approved cemment sheets are required from the following review agencies prior to final site plan approval. It is recommended that applicants cantact the Depart, �,ent of Planning and Development to determine which review agencies are relevant to their site plan application. Virginia Department of Transportation U007 + Frederick County Sanitation Auftrly / Department of Planning and Development �✓ Inspections Department lal� Frederick County Engineer (Public Werks) Frederik CCLMtJ Fire Marst�l Ccuntj Health Department Gfij of Winchester Town of Stephens City Town of Middletown Airport ALdmrq scl & Water Ccnseriaticn District gepartment of Parks and Reaeatien Request for Street Name e mp Ccr�5l .r � c t . m CY %yr CLW 6 Lk-c 2. One copy of the Site Plan application 3. Five Copies of the Final Site Plan for approval 4. One reproducible copy of the Site Plan (if required) 5. A 35mm slide of the Site Plan (if required) SITE PLAN TRACKING SHEET --,-�— File opened V Reference Manual updated/number assigned D-base updated He given to Renee' to update Application Action Summary �Q� CLOSE OUT FILE: Approval (or denial) letter mailed to applicant/copy made for file File stamped "approved", "denied" or'ti�drawn" Reference Manual updated D-base updated File given to Renee' for final update to Application Action Summary U `.Card�Cunmrn�Si,e Plan T—k,ngwpd R—,ttd 113AW0I U. o > a ' �Z RECEIPT Dffie 002798 Received From i Address ! L 1 V 2, pU. rlc For ACCOUNT HOW AMT OF ACCWNT CASH PAID pop C� By AMT PND OJ CHE V CREDIT CARD o o cc" Cv 5 0 5-, 3 Ali V F T T R A C O M P ANY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ' for the HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER @ EASTGATE ' Site Plan Frederick County, Virginia ' prepared for: Triad Engineering, Inc. Winchester, Virginia 1 ' October 29, 2002 RECEIVED JAN — B 2003 ' FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ' 11535 Gunner Court - Woodbridge, Virginia 22192 - 703/590-4932 - (FAX) 703/590-1277 vettra@aol,com TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for the HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER @ EASTGATE Site Plan Frederick County, Virginia prepared, for: Triad Engineering, Inc. I'.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 540/667-9300 prepared by: Vernon E. Torney, AICP President VETTRA Company October 29, 2002 11535 Gunner Court • Woodbridge, Virginia 22192 • 703/590-4932 - (FAX) 703/590-1277 - vettra@aol.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 INTRODUCTION Scope of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Assumptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 EXISTING 2002 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Area Roadway Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Existing 2002 Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Existing 2002Intersection Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 FUTURE "BACKGROUND" TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (Years 2003 & 2007) Planned Roadway Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Traffic Growth Trends/"Grown" Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 "Other" Planned Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Future "Background" Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Future "Background" Intersection Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 PROPOSED "HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER @ EASTGATE" SITE DEVELOPMENT Site Development Plan/Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Development Densities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Site Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Site Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Site Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 FUTURE "TOTAL" TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH SITE (Years 2003 & 2007) Future "Total" Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Future "Total" Intersection Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 INCREMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 RECOMMENDED IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 QUEUING ANALYSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Existing 2002 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 Existing 2002 AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Geometry & Levels Of Service (LOS) . . . . 8 4 Future "Grown" AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5 Future "Other" Development AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6 Future "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7 Future "Background" AM/PM Pk.Hr. Intersection Geometry & LOS a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 8 Generalized Future "Site" AM/PM Peak Hour Trip Distributions a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 9 Future "Site" AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 10 Future "Total" (w/Site Traffic) AM/PM Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 11 Future "Total" (w/Site Traffic) AM/PM Pk.Hr. Geometry & LOS a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 12 Recommended Impact Mitigation Measures a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 iii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Existing 2002 Intersection Level Of Service Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2 "Other" Development Densities & Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3 Future "Background" Intersection Level Of Service Summary a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4 "Site" Development Densities & Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5 Future "Total" Intersection Level Of Service Summary a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 6 Comparison of Future "Background" vs. "Total" Levels Of Service a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J.) iv LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A TIA Scoping Correspondence B Existing (August, 2002) Intersection Turn Movement Counts C Level Of Service (LOS) Information and Criteria D Existing 2002 AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets £ Future "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) F Future "Total" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) G Future "Total" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets -- With Mitigation -- a) Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) b) Yr. 2007 (Buildout) v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) examines the potential traffic impact of the proposed Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate upon the future area road network. The "site", located in Frederick County, just north of Double Tollgate, is undergoing Site Plan review and approval. Site development (buildout) is expected by Year 2007, with an initial "Phase 1" to be built in Yr. 2003. The only change in the area road network by Yr. 2007 is the completion and connection of Maranto Manor Drive from Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) to Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) within the Eastgate Commerce Center. In the interim (Yr. 2003), this facility will only provide access to the site from Rt.522 as a cul-de-sac road. This TIA analyzes existing Yr.2002 and future years 2003 & 2007 AM/PM peak hour traffic conditions at several key intersections along Rt.522 and Tasker Rd. (Rt.642). Proposed land uses for two (2) "other" area developments, as well as the "site", are included in the future traffic volumes. Traffic impact is determined by comparing, via industry -standard intersection capacity analyses, the future "Background" (without site traffic) and future "Total" with site traffic) intersection conditions for each peak hour and condition. All scope, methodology, and assumption parameters within this TIA are in adherence with a July 22, 2002 scoping meeting and confirmed with staff in a September 24, 2002 letter. Existing intersection capacity analysis shows that all three (3) key signalized and unsignalized (stop - controlled) intersections currently operate at "very good to good" (LOS=B to C) Levels Of Service (LOS) for the analyzed peak hours. LOS=C or better are considered "acceptable". After existing traffic volumes are "grown" to future year conditions, and traffic from two (2) "other" area developments are added to the road network, future Yr.2003 "Background" (without/before site -related traffic) intersection capacity analyses show degraded Levels Of Service for both intersections along Rt.522. Whereas the Rt.522/Tasker Rd. unsignalized intersection degrades from LOS=B to LOS=C during the PM peak hour (remaining "acceptable"), the Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 signalized intersection at Double Tollgate will degrade to an "unacceptable" LOS=D during the PM peak hour. Four (4) years later with full buildout of the Home Depot Distribution Center "site", the Yr.2007 "Background" intersection analyses continue to show degrading Levels Of Service with the Rt.522/Tasker Rd. unsignalized intersection also falling to "unacceptable/failing" (LOS=F) levels for the PM peak hour. Only the Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. LlMig77alized intersection will remain at "acceptable" (LOS=C) Levels Of Service during both peak hours. Vehicular access to the Home Depot Distribution Center ("site") will be afforded via one (1) main access point along Maranto Manor Drive — accessing directly to Rt.522. Maranto Manor Dr. will be a cul-de-sac (serving only the "site") in Yr. 2003, but will be extended westward and connected to Rainville Rd. by Yr. 2007. The site is to be developed as a distribution facility with initial construction of 756,000 gsf (gross square feet) floor area in Yr. 2003 and expanded to a 1,008,000 gsf facility by Yr. 2007. Since no specific rates for a distribution center of this type are provided by the industry -standard source "ITE Trip Generation", a "worst -case" land use category (Warehousing) is used within this study. Based on expected daily and peak hour trip data for other similar facilities, as provided by the applicant, much lower traffic volumes than those represented by the "warehousing" category and used within this traffic study are expected. Using the "worst -case" ITE trip rates, it is anticipated that at buildout (Yr. 2007), the "site" could generate up to 5,000 daily one-way trips, with 575 AM peak hour trips and 615 PM peak hour trips. With the addition of the "site traffic", future "Total" (with site traffic) AM & PM peak hour intersection capacity analyses were conducted for both future year conditions. Yr. 2003 "Total" conditions indicate essentially the same (as "background") LOS conditions for all intersections, except the new Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. intersection, which will require a signal to safely accommodate the Phase I "site" traffic. Yr. 2007 "Total" conditions indicate essentially the same (as "background") LOS conditions for all intersections, except that the Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. unsignalized intersection will require a "raised median" to safely accommodate the "buildout" site traffic. Analytical evaluations and comparisons within this TIA have shown that traffic associated with the proposed development of the "Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate " can be easily accommodated in accordance with the submitted development site plan and recommended mitigation measures indicated within this traffic study. No additional road improvements are technically necessary or required. INTRODUCTION Scope Of Study This Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) examines the potential traffic impact of the proposed Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate upon the future area road network. The "site", located in Frederick County, just north of Double Tollgate, is undergoing Site Plan review and approval. Site development (buildout) is expected by Year 2007, with an initial "Phase 1" to be built in Yr. 2003. The only change in the area road network by Yr. 2007 is the completion and connection of Maranto Manor Drive from Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) to Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) within the Eastgate Commerce Center. In the interim (Yr. 2003), this facility will only provide access to the site from Rt.522 as a cul-de-sac road. See Figure 1 for the site location. This TIA analyzes existing Yr.2002 and future years 2003 & 2007 AM/PM peak hour traffic conditions at several key intersections along Rt.522 and Tasker Rd. (Rt.642). Proposed land uses for two (2) "other" area developments, as well as the "site", are included in the future traffic volumes. Traffic impact is determined by comparing, via industry -standard intersection capacity analyses, the future "Background" (without site traffic) and future "Total" with site traffic) intersection conditions for each peak hour and condition. All scope, methodology, and assumption parameters within this TIA are in adherence with a July 22, 2002 scoping meeting and confirmed with staff in a September 24, 2002 letter -- see Appendix A for the scoping correspondence. Methodology The AM & PM peak hour analyses and evaluations of all signalized and unsignalized intersections are in accordance with the 2000 Highway Capacity 1>/lanual (HCM) methodology (acceptable @ minimum LOS=C). All trip generation rates are based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual (6th Edition-1997). Future trip distributions in this study are based on existing traffic distributions/patterns and market area data, as available. Assumptions The following general assumptions are incorporated within this study. - Two (2) phased industrial development -- Yr.2003 (interim please) @ 756,000 gsf and added 252,000 gsf @ Yr.2007 (1,008,000 gsf "buildout") - One (1) site access scenario to be tested for Yr.2003 (Interim Phase): - Full access point onto Rt.522 via Maranto Manor Drive -- only - No direct access point onto Rainville Rd. (emergency only) - One (1) site access scenario to be tested for Yr.2007 (Buildout): - Full access point onto Rt.522 via Maranto Manor Dr. (formerly Beechwood Dr.) - No direct access point onto Rainville Rd. (emergency only) - Maranto Manor Dr. connected thru (between Rt.522 and Rainville Rd.) - Maranto Manor Dr. is full access point (w/crossover) on Rt.522 - Assume no interparcel accesses to adjacent properties - No 24-hour classified traffic counts required on any roads 2 1 �10 .-ti� la-�Jr// ', '}'`.� •`: I v �1 .� 1 . r I' ' ,' + � 2. ,, _ is �I --' Pilk- .:try 1�1` 1! �--'� : ( �1'ir•,;+ t it y , r'a .,� .�� ':'• �;1, 1( :; � w f 1 - . SITE SI % I ' r ._: '-•��,,�L�r \mot•' � ,, i ta'. •�: , '�.'•'"` �, fl J !c' I i,' � 't 1,/' / \J `, �T �l( i � j �. ``:� � �1\••. _ 1•�`\'��/� 1 .1 ';) r'ri�ar rl�� ', 50 , 9" AJJI -•.�•- it //{---.J�4I •. (�\`-, ,� -^ %!�- '''�,-,�' i„��...y. L`.:i� •``1i �,�`'L. ��....,�,,� .` .. T �. _�C , �� u� f ' ,•S �_' -- ,� ' �) ,- , �{ ' �. 1 - .� �:> it-. '. • ,'Y;,,• ,_, ..yr, ,• .,ti , 10129102 -_ N FIGURE Site Location 1 \r E T T R A C O M P A N1 Y No Scale 1 1 c I u - AM & PM intersection turn movement traffic counts required at following intersections: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalizedl) Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalizecl) Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd.(Rt.800) -- (unsignalized) - Summer counts are acceptable - use existing traffic patterns/distributions for background (non site -specific) trip distributions - Existing AM & PM peak hour intersection HCM LOS analysis required: • Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalized) — use VDOT-provided timing data • Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalizeal) • Tasker Rd.(Rt.642)/Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) -- (unsignalized) - No "road link" HCS analyses required - Use historic VDOT counts as basis for "growth" rates (compounded to "background"): -- 6.5% annual growth rate (compounded to future years) - Two (2) "other" area development to be included in "background" traffic conditions: -- "The Shenandoah" (per recent TIA by PHR&A) — as provided -- Development west of site on Tasker Dr.: -- assume additional 300 sfdu built by Yr.2003 -- assume added 300 sfdu (total of 600 sfdu built by Yr.2007) - Assume all existing roads remain as -is for future phases - Utilize "client -provided" traffic distributions for "site" — 48% of all "site" truck to/from Inland Port; remaining 52% use 50%-50% distributions to/from north and south - Utilize latest 6th Edition ITE "average" Daily and "Pk. I-Ir. of Gen." AM/PM (ITE Code 4150) trip rates for site -- (client -supplied trip data is not acceptable to VDOT) - No public transportation improvement projects assumed by buildout year (2007) in study area - No "internal capture" or "pass -by capture" trip discounts to be utilized - One (1) "background" & "total" road network scenario to be tested - Three (3) intersections to be analyzed for Interim (Ph. 1) 2003 "bkgd." & "total" conditions: 1) Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalizedl) 2) Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. (proposed) — (assume unsignalized) 3) Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalizecl) - Five (5) intersections to be analyzed for Buildout Yr.2007 "background" and "total" conditions: 1) Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalized) 2) Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. — (proposed) -- (assume unsignalized) 3) Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalizecl) 4) Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. -- (assume unsignalizecl) 5) Maranto Manor Dr./Rainville Rd. (future) -- (assume unsignalizecl) - Mitigation Investigation/Solving for all future intersections —assume "isolated" operations - Maintain "acceptable" LOS=C Level Of Service for overall intersection - Utilize latest HCS (v.4.1 c) with actual (field -collected) plif and heavy % -- use Arrival Type = 3, 4 sec. amber, 2 sec. all red for future signals — use 75% heavy vehicle factor for future "site" truck -laden movements - Queuing analyses (VDOT Webster's or HCS) required for following movements: Interim (Phase 1) Yr.2003 -- NB Left movement at Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. -- SB Right movement at Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. -- WB Left movement at Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. -- WB Right movement at Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Buildout Yr.2007 -- Same as above (for Interim Phase) - use client -provided mix of trucks vs. cars "site" trips = 50% cars — 50% trucks - No signal warrant studies (per MUTCD) required — only use HCS to determine need for signals k � I � I � I r IL EXISTING 2002 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Area Roadway Network The main existing roads .within the immediate study area include Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike), Tasker Road (Rt.642), and Rainville Road (Rt.800). Brief descriptions of these roads follow: ❑ Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike): Rt.522 is currently a four (4) lane, divided major arterial traversing in a predominant north -south direction within the study area -- between Double Tollgate (Clarke County) to the south and the City of Winchester to the north. Within the study area, this facility currently has 12-foot travel lanes and approximately six (6) foot width paved or gravel shoulders with some curb & gutter sections, where improved. This road exhibits fair -to - good geometrics and a posted speed limit of 55 mph. No planned improvements are scheduled for this section of Rt.522. ❑ Tasker Rd. (Rt.642): Tasker Rd. is a typical two (2)-lane road, traversing in a predominant east -west direction within the study area -- between I-81 (to the west) and Rt.522 (to the east). This major collector facility is approximately 24 feet wide with minimal width gravel shoulders. This road exhibits fair -to -good geometrics and a posted speed limit of 55 mph. ❑ Rainville Rd. (Rt.800): Rainville Rd. is a typical two (2)-lane industrial road, traversing in a predominant north -south direction within the study area -- between Tasker Rd. (to the north) and the site (to the south). This local facility is approximately 24 feet wide with minimal width gravel shoulders. This road exhibits fair -to -good geometrics and a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Existing 2002 Traffic Volumes AM and PM peak period turn movement intersection counts were obtained for the three (3) "key" intersections along Rt.522 and Tasker Road. All intersection counts were conducted by VETTRA Company personnel on Wednesday August 14, 2002 -- see Appendix B for the various count data sheets. Figure 2 presents the Existing along Rt.522 2002 AM/PM peak hour volumes for the intersections 2 and Tasker Road. 61 1 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) 1 per 0.10 PM "K "factor 7C = Traffic Signal 1 U N C,1 — 105 (197) 1 1 L r— 2 (1) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 179 (159) — 1 (1) —I I r 22 (48) —1 157 (111) —I I _ I� M O O W In O W C C� Y. N g 0 O SITE e 1 1 r 1 o n L_ 21 (64) M — 68 (242) I L Rt.277 J f— 65 (155) 26 (34) J Rt.340 195 (90) — 107 (82) --1 o :� �N o v _ b i» 1 10129102 O 1 N V' N FIGURE Existing 2002 AM/PM Peak Hour 1 V E T T K A .►. Traffic Volumes 2 C O 1`,1 P A N Y No Scale ' 6 Existing 2002 Intersection Capacity Analysis Based on the 2002 intersection volumes and intersection geometric conditions, all existing intersections were analyzed via the latest Highway Capacity Software (HCS v.4.1c) capacity analysis package. Figure 3 and Table 1 present the results of the capacity analyses, showing the computed Levels Of Service (LOS) for the AM & PM peals hours. Appendix C provides general LOS information and criteria while Appendix D includes the HCM Summary Worksheets for the peak hours. Existing intersection capacity analysis shows that all three (3) key signalized and unsignalized (stop -controlled) intersections currently operate at "very good to good" (LOS=B to C) Levels Of Service (LOS) for the analyzed peak hours. LOS=C or better are considered "acceptable". TABLE 1 Existing 2002 Intersection Level Of Service Summary AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Overall Intersection Critical Approach Overall Intersection Critical Approach Intersection LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/Avc.Delay LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/Ava.Delay Si Anal Led Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 C/24.8 WB C/25.9 C/30.0 NB C/31.9 Unsignalized Rt.522/Tasker Rd. B EB Bh o.8 B EB B/14.0 Tasker/Rainville Rd. B NB B/10.5 B NB B/10.1 Notes: LOS = Level Of Service -- See Appendix C LOS/Delay = Level Of Service & Avg. Vehicular Delay (seconds) - for "Overall Intersection" LOS/Dly. = Level Of Service & Avg. Vehicular Delay (seconds) - for "Critical Movement" Appch. = Critical Approach -- Worst Operating Approach (e.g.: EB = EastBound) 7 LEGEND A/1.2 = AM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) (Ah.2) = PM Pk.I-Ir. LOS/Delay (sec.) = Traffic Signal I1 � I I I � I � I I FUTURE "BACKGROUND" TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (Years 2003 & 2007) Planned Roadway Networks In accordance with the Frederick County Comprehensive Plans, Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Six -Year Primary and Secondary Road Plans, and as directed by VDOT staff, the future Year 2003 and 2007 area roadway network within this TIA was assumed to be the same as existing. No future public improvement projects are expected by Yr. 2003 or Yr. 2007. Traffic Growth Trends/"Grown" Traffic Volumes In order to project future traffic volumes, the existing volumes must first be "grown", or factored, to the future years. This is performed prior to adding (to the network) the traffic associated with the "other" planned developments. In accordance with the latest available count data and as directed by staff, a 6.5 percent per annum growth rate was utilized for all roads within the study area. Based on these annual growth rates, all turn movement volumes were "grown" to Year 2003 and 2007 levels. See Figures 4a & 4b for the "grown" AM/PM peak hour turn movement volumes. "Other" Planned Developments Two (2) development projects ("The Shenandoah" and developments along Tasker Rd. west of the "site") in the study area are currently planned for construction and are considered herein as the "other" developments. The purpose of identifying and analyzing these "other" developments are to add the traffic associated with them to the future "grown" traffic volumes. The summation of the "groAan" and "other" traffic to the road network comprises the future "background" traffic (before site traffic is added). The two (2) "other" developments are expected to be partially built out by Yr. 2003 and completely built out by Year 2007. Table 2 provides the development densities and traffic generation data for the "other" developments. Included in Table 2 are the following: • Buildout densities (land use types/quantities) • Phasing/phased densities • Trip Generation Rates • Daily, AM and PM Peak Hour Generated Trips E ' LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) = Traffic Signal 1 U r- N N V N — 112 (210) J 1 L ' r— 2 (1) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 191(169) — 23 (51) — 1 1 (1) '-1 I F 167 (118) —► 1 'D N O �✓.� 0n-- N O M � N Q 0 O SITE N � l t 1 i 13 N v rl M 22 (68) -- 72 (258) J 1 L Rt.277 r— 69 (165) ILI 28 (36) —1 r Rt.340 208 (96) — J I 114 (87) -- M � N 1 10129102 l _. C4 i N Future "Grown" AM/PM Peak Hour FIGURE 1 V E T T K A . Traffic Volumes 4a -- c o lN4 P A w v No Scale Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- 1 10 144 (270) i-- 3 (1) 245 (218) — 1 � O C � 10129102 C0M1)ANY] Rt.277 N No Scale LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) = Traffic Signal 1 v M N AIL ° Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 30 (66) —1 215 (152) N_ 'n O ^ N � O � SITE e 1 t �n 'n 'n Cc I- 1— 29 (88) J I L 93 (332) r— 89 (212) 36 (47) 1 Rt.340 267 (123) — r I I 147 (1 12) n b _ _ S M CI oo N n O N 1 Future "Grown" AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- FIGURE 4b VETTRA Co. VETTRA Co. 10/11/02 TABLE 2 lhdeglothgenl .wk4 "OTHER" DEVELOPMENT DENSITIES & TRIP GENERATION DATA PROPOSED DENSITIES AND TRIP RATES ITE Avg. "Pk. Hr.of Gen." Trip Rates (6th Edition - 1997) ITE AM PM Weekday Land Uses & Densities Quantity Unit (Code) Pk.Hr. Pk.Hr. VPD PHASE 1 —YR. 2003 Ihe_SheOaadoah(wotst-case) • (55% of Res. — 20% of Buildout trips) — per applicant's TE — — — — — — Deselopments�esLoLSile_onJaskeLBd. • 300 du Single-family, Detached Residential units 300 du (210) 0.77 1.02 10.00 PHASE 2 — YR. 2007 (cumulative) The Shenandoah (100% of Buildout trips) — per applicant's May 2000 TIA — — — — — Developments—West_oL51es2nlasker_Rd. 600 du Single-family, Detached Residential units 600 du (210) 0.77 1.02 10.00 Moles: du = dwelling unit = VDOT standard daily trip rate Land Uses & Densities PHASE 1 —YR. 2003 Th�Shenandoah�vtorstsase) • (55% of Res. — 20% of Buildout trips) — per applicant's TE :. Developments__WesLoLSite_omlaskeLRd. 300 du Single-family, Detached Residential units Total (Phase 1) _ PHASE 2 — YR. 2007 (cumulative) Th,e_Shenaadoah (100% of Buildout trips) — per applicant's May 2000 TIA DoYelopments_WsLoLSite onSaskeLRd. 600 du Single-family, Detached Residential units Total (Phase 2) _ Note: All computations are automatically rounded. GENERATED TRIPS AM Pk.Hr. PM Pk.Hr. Weekday In Out Total In Out Total VPD 96 67 163 141 155 295 3,419 58 173 231 196 110 306 3,000 153 240 394 337 265 601 6,419 478 336 814 704 773 1,477 17,094 116 347 462 392 220 612 6,000 594 683 1,276 1,096 993 2.089 23,094 12 � I � I � I All "other" development land use information is based on information provided by VDOT and the traffic consultant for "The Shenandoah." The trip generation rates are based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual - 61h Edition. It should be noted that in conformance with the scoping, no trip discounts (internal capture or pass -by) were taken for any of these generated trip calculations, thus representing a "worst -case scenario". "Other" development trip distributions were based on trip distributions from the latest traffic counts recently collected and from the distributions shown in the TIA for "The Shenandoah". Figures 5a & 5b provide the "Other" Development AM & PM peak hour traffic volumes for Years 2003 & 2007, respectively. Future "Background" Traffic Volumes The sum of the "grown" and "other development" traffic volumes comprise the future Yr. 2003 & 2007 "background" traffic volumes -- as shown on Figures 6a & 6b, respectively. Future "Background" Intersection Capacity Analysis ' The "background" traffic volumes, with assumed geometries, were again analyzed via the HCS intersection capacity analysis package. Tables 3a & 3b as well as Figures 7a & 7b present the ' Yr.2003 and 2007 results of the analyses, showing the computed Levels Of Service (LOS) and vehicular delays for the AM/PM peak hours at the various intersections. ' The future Yr. 2003 "Background" (without/before site -related traffic) intersection capacity analyses show degraded Levels Of Service for both intersections along Rt.522. Whereas the Rt.522/Tasker Rd. unsignalized intersection degrades from LOS=B to LOS=C during the PM peak ' hour (remaining "acceptable"), the Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 signalized intersection at Double Tollgate will degrade to an "unacceptable" LOS=D during the PM peal, hour. Four (4) years later with full buildout of the Home Depot Distribution Center "site", the Yr. 2007 "Background" ' intersection analyses continue to show degrading Levels Of Service with the Rt.522/Tasker Rd. unsignalized intersection also falling to "unacceptable/failing" (LOS=F) levels for the PM peak hour. Only the Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. unsignalized intersection will remain at "acceptable" ' (LOS=C) Levels Of Service during both peak hours. Appendices Ea & Eb provide the AM/PM Peak Hour HCM Summary Worksheets for these intersections at Years 2003 and 2007 ' "background" traffic conditions, respectively. u "Other" Developments West of Site on Tasker 4- 39 (137) r— 0 (0) 120 (76) — —1 2 (1) N O O � O DD c .N. Rt.277 Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) SITE "The Shenandoah" 10129102 N V E T T K A - C O M PA NY No Scale LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) = Traffic Signal 1 oo oo o JIL ° 33 (19) —J 87 (57) —1 to d' M CJ N � N O `✓ 0 1 r M M V' M t— 4 (33) J I L 9(14) �— 14 (20) 12 (23) —1 Rt.340 5 (15) — I r I 7 (14) —1 b r oo b 1 Future "Other" Development AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes -- Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- FIGURE 5a 14 1 1 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) C = Traffic Signal "Other" Developments 1 West of Site on Tasker 1 U v ■ _ 80 (278) J I L ° ■ r— 0 (0) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) ' 244 (157) — 66 (37) J 3 (2) —I 1 F 178 (119) —I 0 N O M M 1 O N C 1 � N N SITE 1 r 1 1 v o `�� 18 (67) — 46 (68) J I Rt.277 `— 1— 70 (102) ' 33 (69) J Rt.340 r � I 27 (77) I 36 (72) ---1 N �, vvv 1 "The Shenandoah" 1 �N l0/29/01 C4 1 N Future "Other" Development AM/PM FIGURE ' �� E T T R - Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5b No Scale -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- c o M P A IN v ' 15 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) = Traffic Signal C'4 CO U n IO N M N w — 151 (347) J I L o r-- 2 (1) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 311 (246) — —I F 56 (70) —1 3 (2) I 255 (176) — .... C, O M O .N.. 00 .-• l� C1 � N Q N _ V1 00 M `✓ CD SITE 1 T .y. -- CO M 26(101) J I L — 82 (271) Rt.277 8 f 3 (185) 40 (59) 1 r Rt.340 I 213 (111) — I 121 (102) —1 0 �i < n O M i'C-iC-1 ti N V'. 10129102 1 N Future "Background" AM/PM PeakHour FIGURE \� E T T R A .. Traffic Volumes 6a c o IM P A N, Y No Scale -- Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- 16 ' LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes ' 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) C = Traffic Signal 1 y 1 � v o 00 M n M M ' — 223 (548) � J 1 L ° r— 3 (1) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 490 (374) — —1 r 1 96 (103) —3 ' 5 (4) I 393(271) CD� CD N Cb C C4 N r o � O SITE ' o N1 r N 1 O v' r N � CAI o n n Z t— 37 (154) — 139 (400) 1 L Rt.277 J f— 159 (314) ' 68 (116) Rt.340 294 (200) — I F 183 (184) --1 -, CD n ' O G, C`I ti O �' 10129102 1 Ln N Future "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour FIGURE ' y E T T R A Traffic Volumes 6b No Scale -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- c o M P A 1\ Y ' 17 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 3a Future "Background" Intersection Level Of Service Summary Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Overall Intersection Critical Approach Overall Intersection Critical Approach LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/Av,.Delay LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/Avg.Delay Signalized Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 C/25.5 WB C/28.9 D/40.6 wB E/69.3 Unsignalized Rt.522/Tasker Rd. B EB B/12.6 C EB C/21.0 Tasker/Rainville Rd. B NB B/12.2 B NB B/12.8 TABLE 3b Future "Background" Intersection Level Of Service Summary Yr. 2007 (Buildout) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Overall Intersection Critical Approach Overall Intersection Critical Approach LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/AvQ.Delay LOS/Avg.Delay Appch, LOS/Ava.Delay Signalized Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 E/64.8 WB F/235.5 F'/253.9 WB F/547.6 Unsignal ized Rt.522/Tasker Rd. C EB C/19.9 r EB F/273.8 Tasker/Rainville Rd. C NB Ch5.8 C NB C/18.4 Notes: LOS = Level Of Service -- See Appendix C LOS/Delay = Level Of Service & Avg. Vehicular Delay (seconds) - for "Overall Intersection" LOS/Dly. = Level Of Service & Avg. Vehicular Delay (seconds) - for "Critical Movement" Appch. = Critical Approach -- Worst Operating Approach (e.g.: EB = EastBound) 18 LEGEND A/1.2 = AM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (see.) (.E h.2) = PM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) = Traffic Signal 13 19 LEGEND A/1.2 = AM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) (Ah.2) = PM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) = Traffic Signal I_\ II 20 ' PROPOSED "HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER @ EASTGATE" DEVELOPMENT Site Development Plan/Access The "site", located in Frederick County, just north of Double Tollgate, is undergoing Site Plan review and approval. Site development (buildout) is expected by Year 2007, with an initial "Phase 1" to be built in Yr. 2003. The only change in the area road network by Yr. 2007 is the completion and connection of Maranto Manor Drive from Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) to Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) within the Eastgate Commerce Center. In the interim (Yr. 2003), this facility will only provide access to the site from Rt.522 as a cul-de-sac road. Vehicular access to the Home Depot Distribution Center ("site") will be afforded via one (1) main ' access point along Maranto Manor Drive — accessing directly to Rt.522. Maranto Manor Dr. will be a cul-de-sac (serving only the "site") in Yr. 2003, but will be extended westward and connected ' to Rainville Rd. by Yr. 2007. Development Densities The Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate "site" is to be built out by Year 2003. Table 4 provides a detailed itemization of the proposed development. The site is to be developed as a distribution facility with initial construction of 756,000 gsf (gross square feet) floor area in Yr. 2003 and expanded to a 1,008,000 gsf facility by Yr. 2007. 1 Site Trip Generation Table 4 also presents the calculated AM & PM Peak Hour trip generations for the proposed Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate development. These calculations are based on the ITE Trip Generation fLlanual (Sixth Edition - 1997) trip rates. Since no specific rates for a distribution center of this type are provided by the industry -standard source "ITE Trip Generation ", a "worst - case" land use category (#150 -- Warehousing) is used within this study. Based on expected daily and peak hour trip data for other similar facilities, as provided by the applicant, much lower traffic volumes than those represented by the "warehousing" category and used within this traffic study ' are expected. Using the "worst -case" ITE trip rates, it is anticipated that at buildout (Yr. 2007), the "site" could generate up to 5,000 daily one-way trips, with 575 AM peak hour trips and 615 1 PM peak hour trips — see Table 4. Site Trip Distribution Year 2003 and 2007 site -generated trips were assigned to the road network, based on the latest area traffic patterns and market data from the applicant as shown in Figures 8a & 8b, respectively. Figure 8b shows the expected "diverted" trip distributions caused by the connection of Maranto Manor Drive to Rainville Rd. at Yr.2007. Site Traffic Volumes Based on the previously -mentioned site trip generation and distributions, site traffic volumes are ' assigned to the roadway network. Figures 9a & 9b show the Year 2003 & 2007 site -related AMIPM peak hour traffic volumes. ' 21 VETTRA Co. 9/21/02 TABLE 4 \hdeg\sitegeni.wk4 "SITE" DEVELOPMENT DENSITIES & TRIP GENERATION DATA HOME DEPOT DIST. CTR. @ EASTGATE (as proposed) PROPOSED DENSITIES AND TRIP RATES Land Uses & Densities Ef0NE_UEp0_LMS-T-CjR-@-EAS1GATE Phao-UYL2003) 756,000 gsf Warehousing Buitdou=20071--cum-Watiye 1,008.000 gsf Warehousing Wte-s., Kgsf = (Thousand) gross square feet Land Uses & Densities LjQME_DEPD-T DISI-Cla-P—EAK-GATE Phase-UYL200) 756,000 gsf Warehousing BuijdouL0taQ0.Z) - cumLdatjy-e 1,om,000 gsf Warehousing Note: All computations are automatically rounded. VETTRA Co. ITE Avg. "Pk. Hr.of Gen." Trip Rates (6th Edition - 1997) ITE AM PM Weekday Quantity Unit (Code) Pk.Hr. Pk.Hr. VPD 756.0 Kgsf (150) 0.57 0.61 4.96 1,008.0 Kgsf (150) 0.57 0.61 4.96 GENERATED TRIPS AM Pk.Hr. PM Pk.Hr. In Out Total In Out Total 254 177 431 37 424 461 339 236 575 49 566 615 22 Weekday VPD 3,750 5,000 8% (9Yo) r— Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 10% (8%) — —, [ I F Rt.277 10129102 N 'A V E T T R A - C 0 N4 P A N Y No Scale Maranto Manor Dr. SITE LEGEND 12% (12%) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Trip Distributions (combined cars and trucks) -- "Outbound" shown in italics -- C = Traffic Signal T o o U JIL —1 10% (8%) o� 0 C� o O CO N o (V N Y JI 29% (29%) 71%(71%) —� 0 0 N R ^l O 7% (16%) JIL Generalized Future "Site" AM/PM Peak Hour Trip Distributions -- Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- Rt.340 FIGURE 8a 23 r— Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 10% (8%) --i I �Ro 0 DD 0 8% (9%) L_ Maranto Manor Dr. If Rt.277 10129102 N V E T T R A •& COMPANY No Scale SITE LEGEND 12% (12%) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Trip Distributions (combined cars and trucks) -- "Outbound" shown in i1alies -- = Traffic Signal 1 o M v7 N `V ti o U I I L ° 22% (20?1,,) —1 70% (711) —1 0 :\-,'o 7%(16%) AIL ,- Generalized Future "Site" AM/PM Peak Hour Trip Distributions -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- Rt.340 FIGURE 8b 24 14 (38) r 0 (0) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 26 (3) — 0 (0) •D o 0 a> o oO C � 10129102 V E T T R A coIVl1)AN,, Maranto Manor Dr. 3,750 vpd SITE Rt.277 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.IIr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) = Traffic Signal I1 11 U O 1-0 O JIL ° (0) -' 1 26 (3)M —1 m 0n 00 00 O O o N rti (V N O � JI 52 (123) —1 — 125(301) 1 m o o — b b N in N rn � 00 0 17 (6) 0 (0) 39 (3) 1 Rt.340 0 (0) 0(0) ono b N ti 1 N N Future "Site" AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes -- Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- No Scale FIGURE 9a 25 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) C = Traffic Signal — 0 (0) r- 0 (0) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) O o J 1 L I U ° 1 0 (0) f 0 (0) —1 --� —I 35 (4) 0 (0) b !� o CD o o c C4 O n .=. o N o v o `n o M 1 19 (50) J I L — 0 (0) Maranto Manor Dr. r 1 vp 4,560 d 51(114) -J I 166 —1 (402) 0 0 SITE o c,, oo — 23 (8) J I L — 0 (0) Rt.277 r— 0 (0) 10129102 IcoMPANY 51 (3) J Rt.340 I r 0 (0) - 0 (0) --1 _I a 0000 O N 1 N Future "Site" AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- No Scale FIGURE 9b 26 IFUTURE "TOTAL" TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH SITE (Years 2003 & 2007) � I Future "Total" Traffic Volumes By totaling the future "Background" (Figures 6a & 6b) and site (Figures 9a & 9b) traffic volumes, future "Total" volumes are developed. Figures 10a & lOb present the Year 2003 & 2007 "Total" AM/PM peak hour traffic volumes. ' Future "Total" Intersection Capacity Analysis These "Total' traffic volumes, with assumed geometrics from "background improvements", were ' again analyzed with the HCM intersection capacity analysis procedures. Tables Sa & 5b present the results of the capacity analyses showing the computed Levels Of Service (LOS) and vehicular delays for the AM/PM peak hours. Figures 11a & 11b present this LOS information in graphic ' format. Appendices Fa & Fb provide the Year 2003 and 2007 "Total" AM/PM Peal', Hour HCM Summary Worksheets for both future years, respectively. To fairly compare the effect of site trips (i.e. "Background" vs. "Total' conditions) on the analyzed intersection, the "Total' HCM ' computations used identical control, geometry, etc. as in "improved background" -- only the volumes were changed to compute "Total' LOS's. With the addition of the "site traffic", future "Total" with site traffic) AM & PM peak hour intersection capacity analyses were conducted for both future year conditions. Yr. 2003 "Total" ' conditions indicate essentially the same (as "background") LOS conditions for all intersections, except the new Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. intersection, which will operate at "unacceptable/failing" (LOS=D/E) levels due to the Phase 1 "site" traffic. Yr. 2007 "Total" ' conditions indicate essentially the same (as "background") LOS conditions for all intersections, except for the previously-inentioned Rt.522/Maranto Manor Drive intersection, which will operate at "unacceptable/failing" (LOS=F) levels, and the Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. unsignalized ' intersection will operate at an "unacceptable/failing" (LOS=E) during the PM peak hour only. L 1 27 TABLE 5a Future "Total" Intersection Level Of Service Summary Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Overall Intersection Critical Approach Overall Intersection Critical Approach LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/Avg.Delay LOS/Avg.Delay Appch. LOS/Avg.Delay Signalized Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 C/28.1 WB C/31.9 D/52.6 WB E/70.4 Unsignalized Rt.522/Maranto Manor D EB D/32.1 E EB E/42.2 Rt.522/Tasker Rd. B EB B/13.9 C EB C/24.2 Tasker/Rainville Rd. B NB B/12.7 B NB B/13.2 TABLE 5b Future "Total" Intersection Level Of Service Summary Yr. 2007 (Site Buildout) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Overall Intersection Critical Approach Overall Intersection Critical Approach LOS/Ava.Delay Appch. LOS/Avg.Delay LOS/Av,.Delay Appch. LOS/Av,.Delay Signalized Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 E/76.7 WB F/186.2 F/278.8 WB F/550.9 Unsignalized Rt.522/Maranto Manor F EB F/206.2 F EB F/200.6 Rt.522/Tasker Rd. C EB C/22.2 F EB F/310.9 Tasker/Rainville Rd. C NB C/21.5 E NB E/48.3 Rainville/Maranto Mnr. A WB A/9.1 A WB A/9.3 28 1 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.I-Ir. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) 1 C = Traffic Signal 1 T LI ^^ LI n N N U r� N — 165 (384) J I L o r— 2 (1) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) ' 337(248) — 3 (2) —1 F 56 (70) j 281 (179) —I 0 r� 'v p M O ? . C CDI� > � r/ S2 •--' y M '~ N N O 1^ J Maranto Manor Dr. 3,750 vpd 52 (123) --1 125 --j (301) C, q v SITE 0 1— 44 (107) J I L — 82 (27l ) Rt.277 r— 83 (185) 79 (62) _1 Rt.340 213 (1 I1) — I F 121 (102) V vv 1 b i � 'n C,I O 1 10129102 j N n 1A- N Future "Total" (w/Site Traffic) AM/PM FIGURE 1 V E T T R ' Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 10a No Scale -- Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- c o M P A IN v 29 223 (548) �— 3 (1) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 490 (374) — 40 (7) —I -ri � O O M O ^ 00 N C � C4 CO Wn L— 0 (0) Maranto Manor Dr. I F 4,560 vpd � o SITE Rt.277 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) C = Traffic Signal t III 'm- 96 (103) —3 393 (271) —I •� M �n 00 JI 51 (114) -J --1 166 (402) 11 �i ? m o N"0 N O� rn n co d2 t— 60 (162) J I L — 139 (400) 1-- 159 (314) I20(119) J r 294 (200) — I I 183 (184) —1 o iZI <r r^ n o � N � N M ti O N 1 10129102 N Future "Total" (w/Site Traffic) AM/PM !-A-E T T R ,- .► Peak Hour Traffic Volumes c o ,4 1' A N v No Scale -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- Rt.340 FIGURE 10b 30 LEGEND A/1.2 = AM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) (A/1.2) = PM Pk.I-Ir. LOS/Delay (sec.) = Traffic Signal C] 31 i1 LEGEND A/1.2 = AM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) (A/1.2) = PM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) G = Traffic Signal 1 T CI21.5 � (E/48.3) U 1 J I I L C/22.2 -r— Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) (F/310.9) i I r � 111 1 _o =� A/9.1 N 1 (A/9.3) F/206.2 I J I I F- Maranto Manor Dr. (F/200.6) 1 r f III : SITE 1 E/76.7 (F/278.8) 1 J I I L Rt.277 7- ' I I I Rt.340 1 b b ti N 10129102 l 1 N Future "Total" (w/Site Traffic) .A' AM/PM FIGURE V E T T R A Peak Hour Intersection Geometry & LOS 11b c o 10 P A N YNo Scale -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- 1 32 ' INCREMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS By comparing the "Background" intersection LOS's (Tables 3a & 3b) against the "Total" intersection LOS's (Tables Sa & 5b), it is evident that most of the intersection Levels Of Service have not changed, thus indicating no significant traffic impact (caused by the site) to the background traffic. For comparisons, see Tables 6a & 6b below. ' TABLE 6a Comparison of Future "Background" vs. "Total' Levels of Service ' Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR ' Intersection Backgrd. Total Impact? Backgrd. Total Impact? Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 C C no D D no Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. -- D yes -- F yes Rt.522/Tasker Rd. B B no C C no Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. B B no B B no ' TABLE 6b Comparison of Future "Background" vs. "Total' Levels of Service ' Yr. 2007 (Site Buildout) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Intersection Backgrd. Total Impact? Backgrd. Total Impact? Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 E E no F F no Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. -- F yes -- F yes ' Rt.522/Tasker Rd. C C no F F no ' Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. C C no Dr. A no C F yes -- A no Rainville Rd./Maranto Manor -- ' 33 U � I U � I RECOMMENDED IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES As indicated in Tables 6a & 6b, no significant site traffic impact is indicated for most intersection 1. conditions at either future year. However, impact is indicated at the proposed Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. intersection (at Yr. 2003 and Yr. 2007) and at the Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. intersection (at Yr. 2007 only). Due to these measured impacts, the following specific improvements (mitigation measures) are warranted at these two (2) intersections — see Figures 12a & 12b. Intersection Year 2003 Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Year 2007 Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Recommended Mitigation Measure -- New Signal with turn lanes -- New Signal with turn lanes -- Raised Median along Tasker Rd. LOS after Mitigation AM PM B C B C C C With implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, all Levels Of Service will achieve "acceptable" (LOS=C or better) levels — see Appendices Ga & Gb for the Year 2003 and 2007 "Total" with mitigation) AM/PM Peak Hour HCM Summary Worksheets for both future years, respectively. IQUEUING ANALYSES ' With mitigation measures in place, the following 95% Queue lengths are reported by HCS at the proposed Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. intersection -- see Figures 12a & 12b. All proposed turn lanes accommodate these projected queue lengths. 95% Queue Lengths (feet) Intersection NB Left (in) SB Right (in) EB Left (out) EB Right (out) Year 2003 —AM Pk.Hr. Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. 191, 141' 172' 126' — PM Pk.Hr. ' Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. 72' 25' 183' 347' Year 2007 — AM Pk.Hr. Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. 301' 107' 157' 206' — PM Pk. Hr. Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. 91, 25' 208' 452' ICONCLUSIONS ' Traffic impact via comprehensive intersection capacity analyses has been conducted for existing and future Year 2003 and 2007 conditions -- "Background" (without site traffic) and "Total" with site traffic). Analytical evaluations and comparisons within this TIA have shown that traffic ' associated with the proposed development of the "Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate " can be easily accommodated in accordance with the submitted development site plan and recommended mitigation measures indicated within this traffic study. No additional road ' improvements are technically necessary or required. 1 34 �o �o c f�: 10129102 \t E T T K A C O M P A N Y Rt.277 LEGEND Ah.2 = AM Pk.I-Ir. LOS/Delay (sec.) (Ah.2) = PM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) = Traffic Signal n U Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) J I I L 111 B/13.9 (C/24.2) J v n w/Mitigatiolz JI I Bl"°\('C128.6) Maranto Manor Dr. 183 jt. max queue (Ph9) J 347jt. nuLL queue (Pnr) -- Pz•ovirle Traffic Signal w/turn lazzes SITE:1 C ti C/28.1 (D/s2.6) JIIL T I I I I r Rt.340 b ti (V O N ME N Recommended Impact Mitigation Measures - -- Yr. 2003 (Phase 1) -- No Scale FIGURE 12a 35 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LEGEND A/1.2 = AM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) (A/1.2) = PM Pk.Hr. LOS/Delay (sec.) = Traffic Signal 1 wMltlzatloll C116.7 (C123.9) J I I L C/22.2 T Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) (F/310.9) 1r Provide Raised Median b C y —' o og A/9.1 c N (A/9.3) � iylMMltigatioll b 8l19.7 t- Maranto Manor Dr. J I I (C127 2) 208 f!. max. queue (PH) 452fL max. queue (PA1) Provide Traffic Signal Rt.277 10129102 N :A \1ETTRA A& C O M P A N, Y No Scale b w/turn lanes SITEJ 0 E/76.7 M (F/27s.8) JII� -r I I I I r Rt.340 ,SIC Recommended Impact Mitigation Measures FIGURE -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- 12b 36 d APPENDICES 37 ' APPENDIX 4 ' fiA Scnpinglorrc.pnndence ■ 1 1 1 V,;,'-'E- TTR`,A • Cbje, Ti•aiusportation Planning & Engineering Services 11535 Gunner Court Woodbridge, Virginia 22192 Tel: 703/590-4932 Fax: 703/590-1277 Email: vettra c,aol.com September 24, 2002 via Facsimile & Email 1 Mr. Steven A. Melnikoff (fax) 5401984-5607 Transportation Engineer (email) snielnikofflf-D VirginiaDOT.org VA. Department of Transportation 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, Virginia 22824 Re: Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) "Scoping Confirmation" -- Revised Dear Mr. Melnikoff: ' Since my original Scoping confirmation letter of August 21, 2002, a few Scoping details have been established or changed. Thus, I am providing you this revised confirmation letter reiterating the parameters developed during our TIA Scoping meeting held on July 22, 2002 at your office and subsequent change (shown in underlined italics). In accordance with current VDOT TIA Requirements and the meeting, the following parameters for the TIA of the proposed development within the Eastgate Commerce Center along the west side of Rt.522 and south of Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) in Frederick County ' have been established: I. General - Two (2) phased industrial development -- Yr.2003 (interim phase) @ 756,00 gsf and added 252,000 gsf @ Yr.2007 (1,008,000 gsf "buildout") 1 - One (1) site access scenario to be tested for Yr.2003 (Interim Phase): Full access point onto R1.522 via Maranto Manor Drive -- only - No direct access point onto Rainville Rd. (emergency only) ' - One (1) site access scenario to be tested for Yr.2007 (Buildout): Full access point onto Rt.522 via Maranto Manor Dr. (formerly Beechwood Dr.) - No direct access point onto Rainville Rd. (emergency only) ' - Maranto Manor Dr. connected thru (between Rt.522 and Rainville Rd.) Maranto Manor Dr. is full access point (w/crossover) on Rt.522 - Assume no interparcel accesses to adjacent properties - No 24-hour classified traffic counts required on any roads - AM & PM classified intersection turn movement traffic counts required at following intersections: - Rt.522/Rt277/Rt340 -- (signalized) ' - Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalized) Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd.(Rt.800) -- (tmsignalizecl) - Summer counts are acceptable - use existing traffic patterns/distributions for background (non site -specific) trip distributions I �I 1 Mr. Steven A. Melnikoff September 24, 2002 Page 2 of 3 - Existing AM & PM peak hour intersection HCM LOS analysis required: - Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalized) — use VDOT-provided timing data - Rt.522/Tacker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalized) - Tasker Rd.(Rt.642)/Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) -- (unsignalized) - No "road link" HCS analyses required - Use historic VDOT counts as basis for "growth" rates (compounded to "background"): -- 6.5% annual grou,th rate (compounded to fixture years) - Two (2) "other" area development to be included in "background" traffic conditions: -- "The Shenandoah" (per recent TIA by PHR&A) — as provided -- Development west of site on Tasker Dr.: -- assume additional 300 sfdu built by Yr.2003 -- assume added 300 sfdu (total of 600 sfdu built by Yr.2007) - Assume all existing roads remain as -is for future phases - Utilize "client -provided" traffic distributions for "site" — 48% of all "site " truck tolfrom Inland Port • remaining 52% use 50%-50% distributions tol -oin north and south - Utilize latest 6th Edition ITE "average" Daily and "Pk. Fh-. of Gen. " AM/PM (ITE Code #150) trip rates for site -- (client -supplied trip data is not acceptable to VDOT) - No public transportation improvement projects assumed by buildout year (2007) in study area - No "internal capture" or "pass -by capture" trip discounts to be utilized - One (1) "background" & "total" road network scenario to be tested - Three (3) intersections to be analyzed for Interim (Ph. 1) 2003 "background" & "total" conditions: 1) Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalized) 2) Rt. 522/Maranto Allal7or Dr. (proposed) — (assume unsignalized) 3) Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalized) - Five (5) intersections to be analyzed for Buildout Yr.2007 "background" and "total" conditions: 1) Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 -- (signalized) 2) Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. — (proposed) -- (asszane unsignalized) 3) Rt.522/Tasker Rd.(Rt.642) -- (unsignalized) 4) Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. -- (assume unsignalized) 5) Maranto Manor Dr./Rainville Rd. (future) -- (assume unsignalized) - Mitigation Investigation/Solving for all future intersections —assume "isolated" operations - Maintain "acceptable" LOS=C Level Of Service for overall intersection - Utilize latest HCS v.4.1c) with actual (field -collected) pinf and heavy % -- use Arrival Type = 3, 4 sec. amber, 2 sec. all red for future signals — use 75% heavy vehicle factor for fixture "site " truck -laden movements - Queuing analyses (VDOT Webster's or HCS) required for following movements: Interim (Phase 1) Yr.2003 -- NB Left movement at R1.522/Maranto 11anor Dr. -- SB Right movement at R1.5221Maran10 Manor Dr. -- WB Left movement at R1.522/11aranto Manor Dr. -- WB Right movement at Rt.522/Maranto Allanor Dr. Buildout Yr.2007 -- Same as above (for Interim Phase) - use client -provided mix of trucks vs cars "sile " trips = 50% cars — 50% trucks - No signal warrant studies (per MUTCD) required —only use HCS to determine need for signals Mr. Steven A. Melnikoff September 24, 2002 Page 3 of 3 I trust that the above is an accurate representation of the referenced scoping meeting and subsequent revisions. If you have any corrections or comments, please advise as soon as possible — by COB Friday, September 27, 2002. Otherwise, I will assume the above items to be accurate and valid for the purposes of developing the Home Depot Distribution Center @ Eastgate TIA. Sincerely, VETTRA Company Vernon E. Torney, AICP Certified Planner # 8543 President cc: Mr. Sam Clem — VDOT/Staunton District Mr. Paul Ehrenberg —Triad Engineering, Inc./Winchester Mr. Sean O'Brien — IDI \hdeg\scope 1 a.doc Page 1 of 1 Subj: Home Depot / Eastgate Commerce Center / Traffic Impact Analysis / "Scoping Confirmation" Revised / Route 522, Front Royal Pike / Frederick County ' Date: 10/4/02 11:10:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time 'From: Barry.SweitzeraViriniaDOT.orq To: vettra@aol.com CC: Sam. Clem@Viir iniaDOT.orq, David. Heironimus@VirginiaDOT.org, jcamp@co.frederick.va.us f Sent from the Internet (Details_ A VDOT review has been completed on the referenced Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping. ' It is satisfactory for your office to proceed with the Traffic Impact Analysis utilizing the parameters set forth in the revision dated 09/24/02 as provided to Mr. Steve Melnikoff of this office. ' Please correspond with Mr. Homer Coffman, Assistant Resident Engineer, with future correspondence regarding the Traffic Impact Analysis for Home Depot. d I If there are any questions, please call. Barry J. Sweitzer Trans. Roadway Engineer VDOT -- Edinburg Residency Permit & Subdivision Section 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 (540)984-5631 (540) 984-5607 (fax) APPENDIX B IExisting (August, 2002) Intersection Turn Movement Counts I ' VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 Peak Periods: AM & PM (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 File Name : 5202ew27 ,Intersection: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 (email) vettra@aol.com Site Code : 00152041 by/Board #: bk,kk/D1-0988-0989 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Weather: Fair, Hot Page No : 1 Groups Printed- 1 - Unshifted ' f312i322� Rt:27��I ni.,�h.,...a Nnrf hhni inri EaSlbound Start Thr Rg Hvy App' i Left Thr Rg Hvy App• Left Thr Rg I Hvy App. Left Thr Rg Hvy App. Exclu Inclu Int. Time Left ! u I ht I Total I u ht Total u ht Total u ht Total Total Total Total —06:30 AM 11 /6 s b 7L I lU 1L -t L LV " JJ LV 1V ✓ - -- --- -- 06:45 AM 13 87 4 8 104 11 14 6 1 31 13 68 33 12 114 6 52 23 3 81 24 330 354 'Total 24 165 7 14 196 ! 21 26 10 3 57 1 23 121 61 22 205 11 99 44 7 154 46 612 658 07:00 AM 16 80 3 10 99 11 13 4 4 28 18 76 37 18 131 ! 6 54 23 11 83 43 341 384 07:15 AM 17 57 5 16 79 16 19 4 7 39 14 89 29 12 132 6 50 31 7 87 42 337 379 07:30 AM 15 78 5 17 98 17 22 6 8 45 13 108 20 21 141 5 58 28 11 91, 57 375 432 07:45 AM 9 92 5 15 106 21 14 7 5 42 16 109 25 23 150 9 33 25 9 67 I 52 365 417 Total 57 307 18 58 38265 68 21 24 154 61 382 111 74 554! 26 195 107 38 328194 1418 1612 08:00 AM 13 62 1 18 76 13 16 3 3 32 15 58 25 23 98 7 34 7 2 48 46 254 300 1 08:15 AM 8 67 4 12 79 8 12 1 4 21' 18 65 17 20 100 8 39 24 5 71 41 271 312 08:30 AM 4 54 1 17 59 13 22 5 8 40 I 14 72 19 18 105 , 7 32 26 6 65 49 269 318 08:45 AM 5 66 0 20 71 18 16 3 6 37 16 78 18 16 112 I 4 23 27 6 54 48 274 322 Total 30 249 6 67 28552 66 12 21 13063 273 79 77 41S1 26 128 84 19 238184 1068 1252 ,04:00 PM 10 101 7 13 118 31 59 13 5 103 28 98 17 20 143 13 22 19 3 54 41 418 459 04:15 PM 6 84 5 5 95 31 56 9 11 96 29 107 19 21 155 12 20 27 4 59 41 405 446 04:30 PM 4 136 7 11 14748 61 6 6 115 27 104 25 22 156 6 18 26 1 50 40 468 508 04:45 PM 9 126 8 14 143 I 39 61 21 9 121 36 89 23 24 148 6 22 20 2 48 49 460 509 Total 29 147 27 43 103149 237 49 31 4351120 398 84 87 602 37 82 92 10 211 171 1751 1922 05:00 PM 6 130 3 14 139 30 61 23 8 114 i 32 98 35 24 165 14 33 21 3 68 I 49 486 535 05:15 PM 6 133 9 10 148 38 59 14 5 111 32 129 21 29 182 8 17 15 3 40 47 481 528 115:30 PM 7 77 12 6 96 31 54 11 1 96 32 118 18 16 168 10 23 12 1 45 24 405 429 05:45 PM 8 70 9 10 87 30 60 14 7 104 34 99 24 17 1571 9 19 27 4 55 38 403 441 Total 27 410 33 40 470 129 234 62 21 425 ! 130 444 98 86 672 41 92 75 11 208 I 158 1775 1933 06:00 PM 8 66 8 9 82 31 42 9 2 82 ! 25 103 13 12 141 5 14 14 2 33 25 338 363 ' 06:15 PM 11 77 6 8 94 25 55 6 7 8621 108 21 14 150 2 21 14 3 37 32 367 399 Grand 186 172 105 2012 472 728 169 j443 182 467 2739 148 631 430 90 1209 810 7329 8139 1369 Total 1 239 109 9 372 APPrch 85. 34. 53. 12. 116. 66. 17. 12. 52. 35. % 9.2 5 5.2 5 2 3 2 8 1 2 2 6 Total % 2.5 2 5 1.4 27.5 6.4 9.9 2.3 3.18.7 ! 6.0 2 6.4 37.4 2.0 8.6 5.9 16.5 10.0 90.0 1:1 I U] ' VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 Peak Periods: AM & PM (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 File Name : 5202ew27 Intersection: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 (email) vettra@aol.com Site Code : 00152041 by/Board #: bk,kk/D1-0988-0989 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Weather• Fair Hot Page No : 2 U.522-10522 C522 I C3� RL277—� Southbound Westbound Northbound j Eastbound Start Time Left! Thru i Rght Total Left Thru I Rght App. I Total Left Thru Rght ! App Total I Left Thru Rght I Total eak Hour From 06:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 07:00 AM Volume 57 307 18 382 65 1 68 21 154. 61 382 111 554 26 195 107 328 Percent 14.9 80.4 4.7 42.2 44.2 13.6 11.0 69.0 20.0 7.9 59.5 32.6 07:30 15 78 5 98 17 22 6 45 13 108 20 141 5 58 28 91� Volume Peak Factor ' High Int. 07:45 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 07:30 AM Volume 9 92 5 106 17 22 6 45 16 109 25 150 5 58 28 91 Peak Factor 0.901 0.856 1 0.923 , 0.901 u I Rt.522 I Out In Total 429 382 8111 181 3071 57 Rght Thru Left I I B I O J North N s:� U IONIC—► S/14/02 7:00:00 AM 8/14/02 7:45:00 AM / 2I�i CAI o f !n• 5;� i Io�L — I� ! 1 - Unshifted m I :: - a Oi Ni ! , I I I � Left Thru Rght 61 382 111; i �4 99 F_ 4 1033J Out In Total Rt522 Int. Total 1418 375 0.945 Peak Periods: AM & PM ,Intersection: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 by/Board #: bk,kk/D1-0988-0989 Weather: Fair, Hot VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 (email) vettra@aol.com �322 KLJ4u I MUU14 . I Southbound Westbound 1 Northbound I Start Time Left Thru I Rght Left Thru Rght App. Left Thru u Rght Total I Total teak Hour From 12:00 PM to 06:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:30 PM Volume 25 525 27 577! 155 242 64 461: 127 420 104 Percent 4.3 91.0 4.7 33.6 52.5 13.9 19.5 64.5 16.0 6 130 3 139 30 61 23 114 32 98 35 Volume Peak Factor 05:15 PM High Int. 05:15 PM 04:45 PM ' Volume 6 133 9 148 39 61 21 121 32 129 21 Peak Factor 0., 0.952 end of report -- File Name : 5202ew27 Site Code : 00152041 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Page No : 3 Eastbound App. Int. Total ' Left I Thru Rght : Total Total 651 1 34 90 82 206 j 1895 1 16.5 43.7 39.8 1651 14 33 21 681 486 0.975 05:00 PM 182 14 33 21 681 0.894 0.757 j Rt.522 Out In Total 518 577 1095 271 5251 251 Rght Thru Left /J ( `l, 1 i ! L ~�J �ShI �O North c o) I (— o 't—► IF- 8/14/02 4:30:06 PM 1 � /-2 a —mom a ^ 1= o of j OiQ� 8/14/02 5:15:00 PM �Im; i1-Unshifted i a f I I Left Thru Rght _ 127 42010-4-1 1 I 762 65L1 1 1413 Out In Total Rt.522 �1 I Peak Periods: AM & PM ' . Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. by/Board #: eh/D1-0806 Weather: Fair, Hot I'I , Rt.522 Southbound Start Time Left Thru i Rght I Hvy. 06:30 AM 0 47 2 8 06:45 AM 0 63 8 9 Total 0 110 10 17 07:00 AM 0 59 6 11 07:15 AM 0 50 5 16 07:30 AM 1 72 3 18 07:45 AM 1 70 11 11 Total 08:00 AM 08:15 AM 08:30 AM 08.45 AM 2 251 25 56 1 56 7 14 0 61 12 18 0 52 5 16 1 61 6 19 VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 (email) vettra@aol.com Unshifted File Name : 5202ewta Site Code : 00152041 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Page No : 1 Rt.522 Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Northbound Eastbound I App, 1 I Left Thru Rght Hvy. App. Left Thru Rght Hvy. App. I Exclu. I Inclu. Int. Total j ; Total j Total Total Total I Total 49 9 44 0 4 531 5 0 31 1 36I 13 138 151 71. 20 68 0 8 881 4 0 39 3 43 20 202 222 120 29 112 0 12 141 9 0 70 4 79 33 340 373 65 19 55 0 11 74! 6 0 37 0 43 22 182 204 55 21 83 0 7 104 4 0 35 1 39 24 198 222 76 22 93 0 12 115 4 0 49 4 53 34 244 278 82 18 120 0 23 138 8 0 36 2 44i 36 264 300 2781 80 351 0 53 431, 22 0 157 7 1791 116 888 1004 641 12 76 0 10 88 6 0 22 4 281 28 180 208 73 8 70 0 12 78 4 0 22 4 26, 34 177 211 57 15 68 0 10 83 7 0 16 5 23j 31 163 194 68 16 72 0 12 88 I 6 0 13 2 19 ! 33 175 208 Total 2 230 30 67 262 ( 51 286 0 44 337 1 23 0 73 15 I 04:00 PM 1 115 14 15 130 30 87 0 19 117 11 0 19 5 04:15 PM 1 120 16 15 137 39 94 0 17 133 6 0 16 2 04:30 PM 1 127 9 13 1371 28 104 0 16 132 16 0 29 2 04:45 PM 0 127 16 13 143 37 79 0 23 116 9 0 32 5 Total 3 489 55 56 547 ! 134 364 0 75 498 I 42 0 96 14 05:00 PM 0 134 9 13 143 46 93 0 16 139 I 13 10 0 0 22 28 1 0 05:15 PM 0 119 15 10 134 46 117 0 22 163 05:30 PM 0 87 17 11 104 34 101 0 18 135 11 0 15 1 05:45 PM 0 78 13 9 91 31 98 0 12 12.9 ! 10 0 23 1 Total 0 418 54 43 4721 157 409 0 68 566 1 44 0 88 3 06:00 PM 0 78 10 9 881 34 91 0 6 125 5 0 10 0 06:15 PM Grand Total 1 8 84 1660 12 196 9 257 97 1864 40 525 91 1704 0 0 10 268 131 22291 7 152 0 0 13 507 1 44 Apprch % 0.4 89.1 10.5 23.6 76.4 0.0 23.1 0.0 76.9 Total % 0.2 34.9 4.1 39.2 111.0 35.9 0.0 46.9 3.2 0.0 10.7 1 1 1 961 126 bVb bZ1 30 39 277 316 22 34 292 326 45 31 314 345 41 41 300 341 1381 145 1183 1328 35 30 317 347 38 32 335 367 26' 30 265 295 331 22 253 275 1321 114 1170 1284 151 15 228 243 201 20 248 268 6591 569 4752 5321 13.9 1 10.7 89.3 ' VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 Peak Periods: AM & PM (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 ' . Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. (email) vettra@aol.com by/Board #: eh/D1-0806 Weather: Fair, Hot Rt.522 Rt.522 SouthboundI NorthboundApp Start Time Left I hru i Rght I Left Thru _ Rght Total Peak Hour From 06:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection Volume 01:00 AM 2 251 25 278 80 351 0 Percent 0.7 90.3 9.0 18.6 81.4 0.0 07:45 Volume 1 70 11 82 18 120 0 Peak Factor High Int. 07:45 AM ; 07:45 AM Volume 1 70 it 82 18 120 0 Peak Factor 0.848 ' File Name : 5202ewta Site Code : 00152041 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Page No : 2 Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Eastbound App Left Thru Rght App' Int. Total Total Total i 431 i 22 0 157 179 ! 888 12.3 0.0 87.7 138 8 0 36 44 j 264 1 0.841 07:30 AM 138 4 0 49 53 i 0.781 0.844 i ' I I Left Thru 801 351. 408 431J r8391 _ Out In Total Rt.522 . by/Board #: eh/D1-0806 Weather: Fair, Hot Rt.522 Rt.522 Southbound Northbound I' Start Time Left Thru Rght Left Thru Rght Total Peak Hour From 1200 PM to 06.15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:30 PM Volume 1 507 49 557 157 393 0 ' Percent 0.2 91.0 8.8 ! 28.5 71.5 0.0 0 05:15 Volume 0 119 15 134, 46 117 Peak Factor High Int. 04:45 PM 05:15 PM Volume 0 127 16 1431 46 117 0 Peak Factor 0.974 -- end of report -- VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 Peak Periods: AM & PM (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 File Name : 5202ewta ' . Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. (email) vettra@aol.com Site Code : 00152041 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Page No : 3 Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Eastbound Left Thru Rght APP; j Int. Total j App. 550 48 30.2 163 10 04:30 PM 163 16 0.844 i i Left Thru 157 1 3 550 � 1 Out In Total Rt522 0 111 0.0 69.8 0 28 0 29 159 1266 38 ! 335 0.945 45 1 0.883 1. 1 Peak Periods: AM & PM Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd by/Board #: bh/D1-1895 Weather: Fair, Hot Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Westbound 'Start Time : Left Thru Rght j Hvy. 06:30 AM 0 14 0 0 06:45 AM 0 26 0 0 0 40 0 0 'Total 07:00 AM 0 27 0 0 07:15 AM 0 25 0 0 07:30 AM 0 27 0 0 07:45 AM 2 26 0 0 Total 2 105 0 0 08:00 AM 0 19 0 0 AM 0 20 0 0 '08:15 08:30 AM 0 22 0 0 08:45 AM 0 18 0 0 Total 0 79 0 0 04:00 PM 1 44 0 5 PM 0 53 0 5 '04:15 04:30 PM 0 39 0 2 04:45 PM 0 55 0 3 Total 1 191 0 15 ' 05:00 PM 0 50 0 0 05:15 PM 1 53 0 2 05:30 PM 3 44 0 3 05:45 PM 0 42 0 1 Total 4 189 0 6 06:00 PM 0 42 0 1 PM 0 44 0 0 '06:15 Grand Total 7 690 0 22 Apprch % 1.0 99.0 0.0 Total % 0.5 49.7 0.0 VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 File Name : ta02ewra (email) vettra@aol.com Site Code : 00152041 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Unshifted Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) I Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Northbound Eastbound App. Left Thru Rght 1 Hvy. ' App' 1 Left Thru Rght Hvy. App. Exclu. Inclu. Int. total i Total I Total Total Total Total 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 39 0 53 53 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 37 0 63 63 40 0 0 0 0 0, 0 76 0 0 76 0 116 116 27 0 0 0 0 01 0 50 0 0 50 0 77 77 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 1 0 37 0 62 62 27 1 0 0 0 1 0 53 0 0 53 0 81 81 281 1 0 0 0 1 0 40 0 0 40 I 0 69 69 107 2 0 0 0 2 0 179 1 0 180 0 289 289 19 0 0 o 0 0 0 34 0 0 34 0 53 53 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 2 0 27 ! 0 47 47 22 0 0 1 0 1 0 21 0 0 21 0 44 44 18 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 16 0 0 16 0 35 35 791 1 0 1 0 2 0 96 2 0 98 0 179 179 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 4 30 9 75 84 53 3 0 0 0 3 0 26 2 1 28 6 84 90 39I 1 0 0 0 1 0 46 0 2 46 4 86 90 55 i 0 0 1 0 1 0 39 0 5 39 , 8 95 103 192 4 0 1 0 5! 0 141 2 12 143 27 340 367 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 1 36 1 86 87 541 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 1 0 39 2 93 95 47 1 0 0 0 1 0 26 2 1 28 4 76 80 42 4 0 2 0 61 0 29 0 1 29 2 77 79 193 5 0 2 0 7 1 0 129 3 3 132 9 332 341 42 1 0 0 0 1 0 16 1 0 17 1 60 61 44 ( 1 0 0 0 1 0 25 1 1 26 1 71 72 697 14 0 4 0 18 0 662 10 16 672I 38 1387 1425 77.8 0.0 22.2 ' 0.0 98.5 1.5 50.3 1.0 0.0 0.3 1.3 1 0.0 47.7 0.7 48.4 2.7 97.3 I' VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 Peak Periods: AM & PM (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 File Name : ta02ewra . Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. (email) vettra@aol.com Site Code : 00152041 by/Board #: bh/D1-1895 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Weather: Fair, Hot Page No : 2 Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) ' Westbound Northbound Eastbound APP' App. APp' Start Time Left Thru Rght ! I I Left Thru i Rght Left Total Total I Thru Rght Int. Total Total Peak Hour From 06:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 ' Intersection 07:00 AM Volume 2 105 0 107 2 0 0 2 0 179 1 180 289 Percent 1.9 98.1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 99.4 0.6 07:30 Volume 0 27 0 27 ! 1 0 0 1 i 0 53 0 53 81 Peak Factor 0.892 ' High Int. 07:45 AM 0 07:30 AM 28 1 1 0 0 1 07:30 AM 0 53 0 53 Volume 2 26 Peak Factor 0.955 ; 0.500 0.849 o lo �_ , i01 � �4 m ~ North 8/14/02 7:00:00 AM C N I= ° of iJ ��, 8/14/02 7:45:00 AM m -' � Y I� I r tiLf -1 m Unshifted o O i N i i I Left Rght i 2' Oi I 31 2 Out In Total Rainville Rd. Rt.800 by/Board #: bh/D1-1895 Weather: Fair, Hot ' Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Westbound Northbound _ Start Time Left Thru Rght Total Left Thru ! Rght Peak Hour From 12:00 PM to 06:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 04:30 PM Volume 1 197 0 198 1 0 1 Percent 0.5 99.5 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 1 04:45 Volume 0 55 0 55 ; 0 0 Peak Factor ; 04:30 PM High Int. 04:45 PM Volume 0 55 0 55 1 0 0 ' Peak Factor 0.900 -- end of report -- VETTRA Co. --Traffic Planning/Engineering 11535 Gunner Ct., Woodbridge, VA 22192 Peak Periods: AM & PM (Tel) 703/590.4932 (Fax) 703/590.1277 File Name : ta02ewra ' Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. (email) vettra@aol.com Site Code : 00152041 Start Date : 08/14/2002 Page No : 3 Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) Eastbound Left I Thru I Rght APpi I Int. Total APP. Total 21 0 0.0 1 0 04:30 PM 1 0 0.500 I 159 1 1601 360 99.4 0.6 39 0 39 ' 95 0.947 46 0 46 i 0.870 i �I ol�l c �O _ Irni NOrth `^ 2 Jc ,_.2 OI O 8/14102 4:30:00 PM � o_ !ems 81141025:15:00PM ' rn = ^ L� m Y ICI uK A F Olp,l Unshifted —I N f.110 -- I I Left Rght 2 2, t —T out In Total Rainville Rd. Rt 800 ' PHASE DATA - VEHICLE TIMINGS Signal # County: Location: 803 Clarke 277/340/522 Double Tollgate O PHASE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 rl IAI/�TlllAl C� Minimum Green 8 15 0 8 5 15 0 8 Passage 3.0 5.0 0 3.5 3.0 5.0 0 3.5 Maximum #1 15 30 0 29 15 30 0 29 Maximum #2 15 30 0 29 15 30 0 29 Yellow Change 3.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 Red Clearance 2.0, 2.0 0 2;0 ' 2.0 2.0. 0, 2:0 • • - • 00�00�0� : � - - • • 0 � 00�'000 Recorded Date: 07/31 /02 APPENDIX C ILevel Of Service (LOS) Information and Criteria ' Exhibit 16-2. Level -of -Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections ' Level Of Service (LOS) Stopped Delay per Vehicle (sec.) ' A < 10.0 B > 10.0 and < 20.0 ' C > 20.0 and < 35.0 D > 35.0 and < 55.0 E > 55.0 and < 80.0 ' F > 80.0 Exhibit 17-2. Level -of -Service Criteria for TWSC (Unsignalized) Intersections ' Level Of Service (LOS) Average Total Delay (sec./veh.) A < 10.0 B > 10.0 and < 15.0 C > 15.0 and < 25.0 ' D > 25.0 and < 35.0 E > 35.0 and < 50.0 F > 50.0 1 1 Capacity Manual Source: 2000 Highway ILevel of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay. Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. Specifically, Level -Of -Service criteria are stated in terms ' of the average stopped delay per vehicle for a 15-minute analysis period. The criteria are given in Table 9-1. ' • Level -Of Service A (LOS=A) describes operations with very low delay, i.e., less than 10.0 seconds per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. ' Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. ' • Level -Of Service B (LOS=B) describes operations with delay in the range of 10.1 to 20.0 seconds per vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for ' LOS=A, causing higher levels of average delay. • Level -Of -Service C (LOS=C_ describes operations with delay in the range ' of 20.1 to 35.0 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is ' significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping. • Level -Of -Service D (LOS=D) describes operations with delay in the range of 35.1 to 55.0 seconds per vehicle. At LOS=D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from ' some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. ' • Level -Of -Service E (LOS=E) describes operations with delay in the range of 55.1 to 80.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. ' • Level -Of -Service F (LOS=F) describes operations with delay in excess of 80.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation, i.e., when arrival ' flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes ' to such delay levels. Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual r FREEWAYS General descriptions of operating conditions for each of the levels of service are as follows: 1. Level -of -service A —Level A describes primarily free flow operations. Average travel speeds near 60 mph generally prevail on 70-mph freeway elements. Vehicles are almost completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. The average spacing between vehicles is about 440 ft, or 22 car - lengths, with a maximum density of 12 pc/mi/ln. This affords the motorist a high level of physical and psychological comfort. The effects of minor incidents or breakdowns are easily absorbed at this level. Although they may cause a deterioration in LOS in the vicinity of the incident, standing queues will not form, and traffic quickly returns to LOS A on passing the disruption. 2. Level -of -service B—Level B also represents reasonably free -flow conditions, and speeds of over 57 mph are maintained on 70-mph freeway elements. The average spacing between ve- hicles is about 260 ft, or 13 car -lengths, with a maximum density of 20 pc/mi/In. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and the general level of physical and psychological comfort provided to drivers is still high. The effects of minor incidents and breakdowns are still easily ab- sorbed, though local deterioration in service would be more severe than for LOS A. 3. Level -of -service C—Level C provides for stable operations, but flows approach the range in which small increases in flow will cause substantial deterioration in service. Average travel speeds are still over 54 mph. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is noticeably restricted at LOS C, and lane changes require additional care and vigilance by the driver. Average spacings are in the range of 175 ft, or 9 car -lengths, with a maximum density of 30 pc/mi/ln. Minor incidents may still be absorbed, but the local deterioration in service will be sub- stantial. Queues may be expected to form behind any significant blockage. The driver now experiences a noticeable increase in tension due to the additional vigilance required for safe oper- ation. 4. Level -of -service D—Level D borders on unstable flow. In this range, small increases in flow cause substantial deterioration in service. Average travel speeds of 46 mph or more can still be maintained on 70-mph freeway elements. Freedom to ma- neuver within the traffic stream is severely limited, and the driver experiences drastically reduced physical and psycholog- ical comfort levels. Even minor incidents can be expected to create substantial queuing, because the traffic stream has little space to absorb disruptions. Average spacings are about 125 ft, or 6 car -lengths, with a maximum density of 42 pc/mi/ln. 5. Level -of -service E—The boundary between LOS D and LOS E describes operation at capacity. Operations in this level are extremely unstable, because there are virtually no usable gaps in the traffic stream. Vehicles are spaced at approximately 80 ft, or 4 car -lengths, at relatively uniform headways. This, however, represents the minimum spacing at which stable flow can be accommodated. Any disruption to the traffic stream, such as a vehicle entering from a ramp, or a vehicle changing lanes, causes following vehicles to give way to admit the vehicle. This condition establishes a disruption wave which propagates through the upstream traffic flow. At capacity, the traffic stream has no ability to dissipate even the most minor disruptions. Any incident can be expected to produce a serious breakdown with extensive queuing. The range of flows encompassed by LOS E is relatively small compared to other levels, but reflects a sub- stantial deterioration in service. Maneuverability within the traffic stream is extremely limited, and the level of physical and psychological comfort afforded to the driver is extremely poor. Average travel speeds at capacity are approximately 30 mph. 6. Level -of -service F—Level F describes forced or breakdown flow. Such conditions generally exist within queues forming behind breakdown points. Such breakdowns occur for a number of reasons: a. Traffic incidents cause a temporary reduction in the ca- pacity of a short segment, such that the number of vehicles arriving at the point is greater than the number of vehicles that can traverse it. b. Recurring points of congestion exist, such as merge or weaving areas and lane drops, where the number of vehicles arriving is greater than the number of vehicles traversing the point. c. In forecasting situations, any location presents a problem when the projected peak hour (or other) flow rate exceeds the estimated capacity of the location. It is noted that in all cases, breakdown occurs when the ratio of actual arrival flow rate to actual capacity or the forecasted flow rate to estimated capacity exceeds 1.00. Operations at such a point will generally be at or near capacity, and downstream operations may be better as vehicles pass the bottleneck (as- suming that there are no additional downstream problems). The LOS F operations observed within a queue are the result of a breakdown or bottleneck at a downstream point. The designa- tion "LOS F" is used, therefore, to identify the point of the breakdown or bottleneck, as well as the operations within the queue which forms behind it. The extent of queuing, and the delays caused by queuing, are of great interest in the analysis of congested freeway segments. Chapter 6 contains a methodology for estimating the queue length and delays behind a bottleneck with known arrival and discharge rates. The procedure allows a rough quantification of the extent of congestion created by a LOS F situation. BASIC RELATIONSHIPS Maximum Service Flow Rate Per Lane Table 3-1 presents criteria for maximum service flow rate, MSF, under ideal conditions, for 70-mph, 60-mph, and 50-mph design speed elements. These values are computed from the volume -to -capacity ratios, v/c, as follows, then rounded to the nearest 50 pcphpl. MSF, = c, X (v/c), (3-1) where: MSF, = maximum service flow rate per lane for LOS i under ideal conditions, in pcphpl; (v/c), = maximum volume -to -capacity ratio associated with LOS i; ci = capacity under ideal conditions for freeway element of design speed j, 2,000 pcphpl for 60-mph and 70- mph freeway elements, 1,900 pcphpl for 50-mph free- way elements; the value of c, is synonymous with the maximum service flow rate for LOS E in Table 3-1. Note that all values of MSF given in Table 3-1 have been rounded to the nearest 50 pcphpl. fie• � ,T�r' ` ®, ` Wit, ��G - _> • � / 1 1 I •v •jY 1 fury I APPENDIX D I Existing 2002 AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection ICapacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets r j u n n HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: AM Pk-Hr. Year Existing 2002 Condition Project ID: File: 5202EA27 E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I I I No. Lanes 1 0 1 1 I 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 I 1 2 1 I LGConfig I LT R I LT R 1 L T R I L T R I Volume 126 195 107 165 68 21 161 382 111 157 307 18 1 Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 0 I 0 1 0 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 28.0 15.0 29.0 Yellovr 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 497 1599 0.49 0.31 26.0 C 25.2 C R 445 1429 0.27 0.31 23.6 C Westbound LT 312 1003 0.50 0.31 26.5 C 25.9 C R 445 1429 0.05 0.31 21.8 C Northbound L 262 1570 0.25 0.17 33.1 C T 1011 3139 0.41 0.32 24.1 C 24.9 C R 452 1404 0.27 0.32 22.9 C Southbound L 262 1570 0.24 0.17 33.0 C T 1011 3139 0.34 0.32 23.4 C 23.7 C R 1404 1404 0.01 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 24.8 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C u n n 11 HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year Existing 2002 Condition Project ID: File: 5202EP27 E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I I I No. Lanes I 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 I LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 134 90 82 1155 242 64 1127 420 104 125 525 27 1 Lane Width*1 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 I RTOR Vol 1 0 I 0 1 0 1 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right 1 EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 35.0 15.0 22.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 514 1321 0.32 0.39 19.5 B 19.0 B R 593 1524 0.18 0.39 18.2 B Westbound LT 518 1332 0.81 0.39 33.7 C 31.5 C R 593 1524 0.11 0.39 17.7 B Northbound L 269 1612 0.53 0.17 36.3 D T 788 3223 0.60 0.24 31.4 C 31.9 C R 352 1442 0.33 0.24 28.5 C Southbound L 269 1612 0.10 0.17 31.9 C T 788 3223 0.68 0.24 33.2 C 31.6 C R 1442 1442 0.02 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 30.0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C U1 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Existing 2002 Condition Project ID: File: 5202EATA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 80 351 2 251 25 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 102 450 2 295 29 Percent Heavy Vehicles 15 -- -- 15 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 22 157 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 26 186 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 17 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config L L I I L R v (vph) 102 2 26 186 C(m) (vph) 1144 1020 428 863 I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: ' Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Existing 2002 Condition Project ID: File: 5202EPTA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) ' North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 u n Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 157 393 1 501 49 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 186 467 1 522 50 Percent Heavy Vehicles 12 -- -- 12 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade M Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 48 ill 0.88 0.88 54 126 5 5 0 0 1 1 L R M Approach Movement Lane Config Delay, NB 1 L Queue Length, and Level of SB Westbound 4 1 7 8 9 L I Service Eastbound 1 10 11 I L 12 R v (vph) 186 1 54 279 126 729 C(m) (vph) v/c 931 0.20 1023 0.00 0.19 0.17 95% queue length 0.74 0.00 0.70 0.62 Control Delay ' LOS 9.8 A 8.5 A 21.0 C 11.0 B Approach Delay 4.0 1B Approach LOS HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County 1 Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Existing 2002 Condition Project ID: File: TA02EARA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound ' Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 179 1 2 105 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 210 1 2 109 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R ' Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 2 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) 0 2 4 0 ' C(m) (vph) 1463 1342 664 823 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 Control Delay ' LOS 7.5 A 7.7 A 10.5 B 9.4 A Approach Delay 10.5 Approach LOS B I I F C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Existing 2002 Condition Project ID: File: TA02EPRA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 159 1 1 ly/ U Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 182 1 1 218 0- Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Uostream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 1 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach ' Movement Lane Config v (vph) ' C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length ' Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 LT LT I L R I 1334 1374 598 853 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 7.7 7.6 11.0 9.2 A A B A 10.1 B I I APPENDIX E IFuture "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary worksheets ' a) Year 2003 (Phase 1) b) Year 2007 (Buildout) 1 11 APPENDIX Ea IFuture "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection ICapacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets F -- Year 2003 (Phase 1) -- F HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: AM Pk-Hr. Year Yr. 2003 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5203BA27 E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I No. Lanes I 0 I I I 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 I 1 2 1 I 1 1 LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 140 213 121 183 82 26 172 426 126 194 373 36 1 Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 I RTOR Vol I 0 I 0 1 0 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 30.0 13.0 29.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 517 1551 0.54 0.33 25.6 C 24.6 C R 476 1429 0.28 0.33 22.4 C Westbound LT 298 894 0.64 0.33 30.2 C 28.9 C R 476 1429 0.06 0.33 20.5 C Northbound L 227 1570 0.34 0.14 35.6 D T 1011 3139 0.46 0.32 24.6 C 25.6 C R 452 1404 0.30 0.32 23.3 C Southbound L 227 1570 0.46 0.14 36.7 D T 1011 3139 0.41 0.32 24.1 C 24.7 C R 1404 1404 0.03 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 25.5 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C U I U HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year Yr. 2003 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5203BP27 E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I I I No. Lanes ( 0 1 1 I 0 1 1 I 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 I LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 159 ill 102 1185 271 101 1150 502 134 135 598 51 I Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 0 I 0 1 0 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 35.0 15.0 22.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 367 944 0.61 0.39 25.0 C 22.6 C R 593 1524 0.23 0.39 18.6 B Westbound LT 461 1185 1.04 0.39 80.5 F 69.3 E R 593 1524 0.18 0.39 18.2 B Northbound L 269 1612 0.63 0.17 39.5 D T 788 3223 0.72 0.24 34.3 C 34.5 C R 352 1442 0.43 0.24 29.5 C Southbound L 269 1612 0.13 0.17 32.2 C T 788 3223 0.77 0.24 36.5 D 33.6 C R 1442 1442 0.04 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 40.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. ' Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County ' Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5203BATA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) ' Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 116 378 2 276 35 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 148 484 2 324 41 Percent Heavy Vehicles 15 -- -- 15 -- -- Median Type Raised curb ' RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 ' L T R 1 L T R Volume 56 255 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 66 303 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 ' Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L L I I L R v (vph) 148 2 66 303 ' C(m) (vph) 1102 989 360 845 v/c 0.13 0.00 0.18 0.36 95% queue length 0.46 0.01 0.66 1.64 ' Control Delay 8.8 8.6 LOS A A 17.2 C 11.6 B Approach Delay 12.6 Approach LOS B HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. ' Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. ' Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5203BPTA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) ' Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments ' Major Street: Approach Northbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 Southbound 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 265 432 1 552 91 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 315 514 1 569 93 Percent Heavy Vehicles 12 -- -- 12 -- -- Median Type Raised curb ' RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R ' Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 70 176 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 79 200 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 ' Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L L I I L R v (vph) 315 1 79 200 ' C(m) (vph) 858 981 170 704 v/c 0.37 0.00 0.46 0.28 95% queue length 1.70 0.00 2.18 1.17 Control Delay 11.6 8.7 ' LOS B A 43.3 E 12.1 B Approach Delay 21.0 Approach LOS C � I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: TA03BARA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 311 3 2 151 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 365 3 2 157 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) U z e U C(m) (vph) 1405 1174 506 673 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 951. queue length 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.00 Control Delay 7.6 8.1 12.2 10.3 LOS A A B B Approach Delay 12.2 Approach LOS B HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: TA03BPRA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 246 2 1 347 U Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 282 2 1 385 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume .5 1 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vpn) U 1 U C(m) (vph) 1157 1261 418 750 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 Control Delay 8.1 7.9 13.7 9.8 LOS A A B A Approach Delay 12.8 Approach LOS B n APPENDIX Eb IFuture "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection ICapacity Analysis HCM Summary worksheets -- Year 2007 (Buildout) -- i U U r U HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: AM Pk.Hr. Year Yr. 2007 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5207BA27 E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound 1 L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1 I I I No. Lanes I 0 1 1 I I 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 168 294 183 1159 139 37 1120 569 192 1144 527 72 I Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vol 1 0 I 0 1 0 1 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A 1 Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right 1 EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 32.0 13.0 27.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Appr/ Lane Lane Group Grp Capacity Cycle Length: 90.0 _Intersection Performance Summary Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Flow Rate (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 399 1121 1.01 0.36 76.6 E 58.4 E R 508 1429 0.40 0.36 22.3 C Westbound LT 236 664 1.47 0.36 262.3 F 235.5 F R 508 1429 0.08 0.36 19.3 B Northbound L 227 1570 0.57 0.14 39.4 D T 942 3139 0.66 0.30 29.1 C 30.0 C R 421 1404 0.50 0.30 26.8 C Southbound L 227 1570 0.70 0.14 46.2 D T 942 3139 0.62 0.30 28.4 C 29.1 C R 1404 1404 0.06 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 64.8 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = E secs U 11 � I HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2007 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5207BP27 -- with "Site" traffic E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound 1 Northbound I Southbound 1 L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1 I I I I I No. Lanes I 0 1 1 I 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 I LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 1116 200 184 1314 400 154 1246 708 257 152 817 102 I Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 I RTOR Vol I 0 I 0 1 0 1 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 35.0 15.0 22.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 158 406 2.63 0.39 780.2 F 500.8 F R 593 1524 0.41 0.39 20.4 C Westbound LT 315 809 2.39 0.39 661.5 F 547.6 F R 593 1524 0.27 0.39 19.1 B Northbound L 269 1612 1.03 0.17 99.2 F T 788 3223 1.01 0.24 68.6 E 70.1 E R 352 1442 0.82 0.24 46.5 D Southbound L 269 1612 0.20 0.17 32.7 C T 788 3223 1.06 0.24 82.6 F 71.3 E R 1442 1442 0.07 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 253.9 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5207BATA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 173 504 3 385 50 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 221 646 3 452 58 Percent Heavy Vehicles 15 -- -- 15 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF -- 0.84 0.84 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 114 467 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config L L I I L R v (vph) 221 3 114 467 C(m) (vph) 966 852 239 768 v/c 0.23 0.00 0.48 0.61 95% queue length 0.88 0.01 2.38 4.19 Control Delay 9.8 9.2 33.1 16.7 LOS A A D C Approach Delay 19.9 Approach LOS C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. ' Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. ' Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: 5207BPTA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) ' Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 415 607 1 756 146 ' Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 494 722 1 779 150 Percent Heavy Vehicles 12 -- -- 12 -- -- Median Type Raised curb ' RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R ' Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 103 271 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 117 307 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade (0) 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config L L 1 1 L R v (vph) 494 1 117 307 ' C(m) (vph) 673 813 44 600 v/c 0.73 0.00 2.66 0.51 950 queue length 6.43 0.00 12.61 2.91 Control Delay 23.6 9.4 947.2 17.1 ' LOS C A F C Approach Delay 273.8 Approach LOS F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: TA07BARA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 490 5 3 223 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 576 5 3 232 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume y V Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) U J 0 v C(m) (vph) 1318 978 342 511 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.00 Control Delay 7.7 8.7 15.8 12.0 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 15.8 Approach LOS C � I � I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Bkgrd." Condition Project ID: File: TA07BPRA East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 374 4 1 548 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 429 4 1 608 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vpn) C(m) (vph) v 956 1 1111 11 252 - 620 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.01 Control Delay 8.8 8.2 19.9 10.8 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 18.4 Approach LOS C APPENDIX F Future "Total" AM/PM Pealc Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets a) Year 2003 (Phase 1) b) Year 2007 (Buildout) APPENDIX Fa Future "Total" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets -- Year 2003 (Phase 1) -- � I 1I � I � I � I I U HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: AM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TA27 -- with "Site" traffic E/W St: Rt.277/•Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound 1 L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1 I I I I I No. Lanes I 0 1 1 I 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 I LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R Volume 179 213 121 183 82 44 172 551 126 1124 455 48 1 Lane Width I 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 0 I 0 1 0 1 0 1 Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 30.0 13.0 29.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 424 1273 0.77 0.33 35.1 D 31.4 C R 476 1429 0.28 0.33 22.4 C Westbound LT 269 806 0.71 0.33 34.9 C 31.9 C R 476 1429 0.11 0.33 20.8 C Northbound L 227 1570 0.34 0.14 35.6 D T 1011 3139 0.59 0.32 26.5 C 26.8 C R 452 1404 0.30 0.32 23.3 C Southbound L 227 1570 0.61 0.14 40.8 D T 1011 3139 0.50 0.32 25.0 C 26.2 C R 1404 1404 0.04 1.00 0.0+ A intersection Delay = 28.1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C 11 HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TP27 -- with "Site" traffic E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I I I No. Lanes I 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 I 1 2 1 I 1 2 1 I LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 162 111 102 1185 271 107 1150 519 134 168 811 107 1 Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 35.0 15.0 22.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Appr/ Lane Lane Group Grp Capacity Cycle Length: 90.0 _Intersection Performance Summary Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Flow Rate (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 357 917 0.64 0.39 26.2 C 23.4 C R 593 1524 0.23 0.39 18.6 B Westbound LT 458 1177 1.05 0.39 82.7 F 70.4 E R 593 1524 0.19 0.39 18.3 B Northbound L 269 1612 0.63 0.17 39.5 D T 788 3223 0.74 0.24 35.1 D 35.0- C R 352 1442 0.43 0.24 29.5 C Southbound L 269 1612 0.26 0.17 33.2 C T 788 3223 1.05 0.24 80.2 F 68.3 E R 1442 1442 0.08 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 52.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D secs � I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TAMM -- with "Site" traffic (Phase 1) East/West Street: Maranto Manor Dr. North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 182 494 530 72 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 233 633 623 84 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 -- -- -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 52 125 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 61 147 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 75 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L I I L R v (vph) 233 61 147 C(m) (vph) 535 109 509 v/c 0.44 0.56 0.29 95% queue length 2.19 2.65 1.19 Control Delay 16.8 73.6 14.9 LOS C F B Approach Delay 32.1 Approach LOS D HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TPMM -- with "Site" traffic (Buildout) East/West Street: Maranto Manor Dr. North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 26 697 728 11 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 30 829 750 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 -- -- -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 123 301 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 139 342 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 75 Percent Grade (a) 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 L 1 R Configuration Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config L I 1 L R v (vph) 30 139 342 C(m) (vph) 502 189 454 v/c 0.06 0.74 0.75 95% queue length 0.19 4.74 6.31 Control Delay 12.6 63.8 33.4 LOS B F D Approach Delay 42.2 Aoproach LOS E F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: ' Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. ' Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TATA -- with "Site" traffic ' East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 ' Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R u 0 11 Volume 130 417 2 322 35 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 166 534 2 378 41 Percent Heavy Vehicles 22 -- -- 15 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade M Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 56 281 0.84 0.84 66 334 5 12 0 0 1 1 L R No ' Approach Movement Lane Config Delay, NB 1 L Queue Length, and Level of SB Westbound 4 1 7 8 9 L I Service Eastbound 1 10 11 I L 12 R v (vph) 166 2 66 334 ' C(m) (vph) 1006 945 317 790 v/c 0.17 0.00 0.21 0.42 95% queue length 0.59 0.01 0.77 2.12 Control Delay 9.3 8.8 19.3 12.9 ' LOS A A C B Approach Delay 13.9 Approach LOS B L Il � I 11 11 11 � I J HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk-Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TPTA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 303 517 1 561 91 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 360 615 1 578 93 Percent Heavy Vehicles 20 -- -- 12 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 79 203 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 6 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 17 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config L L I I L R v (vph) 360 1 79 203 C(m) (vph) 804 895 147 696 v/c 0.45 0.00 0.54 0.29 9506 queue length 2.33 0.00 2.66 1.21 Control Delay 13.1 9.0 54.9 12.3 LOS B A F B Approach Delay 2 4.2 Approach LOS C � I 11 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. ' Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. ' jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: TA03TARA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) ' North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R ' Volume PHF 0 0.85 337 0.85 3 0.85 2 165 0.96 0.96 0 0.96 Peak -Hour Factor, Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 396 3 2 171 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided ' RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R ' Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 3 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 0 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 ' Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 950 queue length ' Control Delay LOS u 1388 0.00 0.00 7.6 A z 1144 0.00 0.01 8.2 A o 476 0.01 0.04 12.7 B U 647 0.00 0.00 10.6 B Approach Delay Approach LOS 12.7 B � I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: TA03TPRA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 248 2 1 384 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 285 2 1 426 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume -3 1 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) 0 i 6 2 C(m) (vph) 1117 1258 394 747 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.01 Control Delay 8.2 7.9 14.3 9.8 LOS A A B A Approach Delay 13.2 Approach LOS B APPENDIX Fb Future "Total" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets -- Year 2007 (Buildout) -- J f� � I U � I � I HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: AM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TA27 -- with "Site" traffic E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I I I No. Lanes 1 0 1 1 I 0 1 1 I 1 2 1 I 1 2 1 I LGConfig ( LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 1120 294 183 1159 139 60 1120 737 192 1185 636 89 1 Lane Width 1 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 0 I 0 1 0 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds I Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 35.0 13.0 24.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 376 967 1.22 0.39 149.6 F 109.9 F R 556 1429 0.37 0.39 20.0- B Westbound LT 252 647 1.38 0.39 220.1 F 186.2 F R 556 1429 0.13 0.39 17.8 B Northbound L 227 1570 0.57 0.14 39.4 D T 837 3139 0.96 0.27 53.8 D 47.8 D R 374 1404 0.56 0.27 30.3 C Southbound L 227 1570 0.91 0.14 73.7 E T 837 3139 0.84 0.27 39.2 D 42.4 D R 1404 1404 0.07 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 76.7 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = E HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Rt.277/Rt.340 Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Clarke County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TP27 -- with "Site" traffic E/W St: Rt.277/Rt.340 N/S St: Rt.522 (Stonewall Jackson Hwy) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound 1 Northbound I Southbound 1 L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I I I No. Lanes I 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 I 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 LGConfig I LT R I LT R I L T R I L T R I Volume 1119 200 184 1314 400 162 1246 730 257 195 1102 176 1 Lane Width I 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A Peds 1 Peds WB Left A I SB Left A Thru A I Thru A Right A I Right A A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 35.0 15.0 22.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 157 403 2.68 0.39 799.2 F 514.5 F R 593 1524 0.41 0.39 20.4 C Westbound LT 312 802 2.41 0.39 671.8 F 550.9 F R 593 1524 0.29 0.39 19.2 B Northbound L 269 1612 1.03 0.17 99.2 F T 788 3223 1.04 0.24 77.1 E 75.1 E R 352 1442 0.82 0.24 46.5 D Southbound L 269 1612 0.36 0.17 34.1 C T 788 3223 1.43 0.24 233.2 F 189.5 F R 1442 1442 0.12 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 278.8 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. intersection: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TAMM -- with "Site" traffic (Buildout) East/West Street: Maranto Manor Dr. North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 242 677 778 61 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 310 867 915 71 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 -- -- -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 51 166 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 59 195 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 75 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L I I L R v (vph) 310 59 195 C(m) (vph) 384 28 391 v/c 0.81 2.11 0.50 95% queue length 7.11 7.02 2.69 Control Delay 43.7 811.6 23.0 LOS E F C Approach Delay 206.2 Approach LOS F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TPMM -- with "Site" traffic (Buildout) East/West Street: Maranto Manor Dr. North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 34 1022 1027 11 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 40 1216 1058 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 -- -- -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade M Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Approach Movement Lane Config I 114 0.88 129 75 0 1 1 L R 0.88 456 75 No Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L I I L R v (vph) 40 1G7 9JU C(m) (vph) 347 111 343 v/c 0.12 1.16 1.33 9510 queue length 0.39 8.17 21.92 Control Delay 16.7 209.2 198.1 LOS C F F Approach Delay 200.6 Approach LOS F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. ' Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County ' Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TATA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) ' Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 173 555 3 447 50 ' Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.85 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 221 711 3 525 58 Percent Heavy Vehicles 15 -- -- 15 -- -- Median Type Raised curb ' RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R ' Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 96 393 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 114 467 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 ' Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config L L I I L R v (vph) 221 3 114 467 ' C(m) (vph) 903 803 219 728 v/c 0.24 0.00 0.52 0.64 95% queue length 0.96 0.01 2.70 4.69 Control Delay 10.3 9.5 ' LOS B A 38.0 E 18.4 C Approach Delay 22.2 Approach LOS C �� I � I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rt.522/Tasker Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File.: 5207TPTA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pike) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R 1 L T R Volume 415 721 1 767 146 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.84 0.84 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 494 858 1 790 150 Percent Heavy Vehicles 12 -- -- 12 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 Configuration L T L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 ► 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume --- Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.88 0.88 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 117 307 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Con -fig L L I I L R v (vph) 494 1 11/ Jvi C(m) (vph) 666 718 40 596 v/c 0.74 0.00 2.92 0.52 9506 queue length 6.59 0.00 13.00 2.95 Control Delay 24.3 10.0+ 17.3 LOS C B F C Approach Delay 310.9 Approach LOS F L HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. ' Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: TA07TARA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) ' Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 490 40 3 223 0 ' Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 576 47 3 232 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided ' RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 23 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 46 0 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) 0 3 46 0 ' C(m) (vph) 1318 944 264 511 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.01 0.62 0.00 Control Delay 7.7 8.8 21.5 12.0 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 21.5 Approach LOS C 1 u 11 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: TA07TPRA -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 374 7 1 548 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 429 8 1 608 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume JU I Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 112 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) U 1 11L G C(m) (vph) 956 1107 188 620 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 9510 queue length 0.00 0.00 3.29 0.01 ' Control Delay LOS 8.8 A 8.3 A 49.0 E 10.8 B Approach Delay 48.3 Approach LOS E � I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rainville Rd/Maranto Manor Dr. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: RA07TAMM -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Maranto Manor Dr. North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume Y U JJ V Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 0 43 9 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 75 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 0 19 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 23 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 75 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 0 Configuration LR Approach Movement Lane Config Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 LT I LR I v (vph) 43 GJ C(m) (vph) 1247 901 v/c 0.03 0.03 951C queue length 0.11 0.08 Control Delay 8.0 9.1 LOS A A Approach Delay 9.1 Approach LOS A I I El F HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Rainville Rd/Maranto Manor Dr. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: RA07TPMM -- with "Site" traffic East/West Street: Maranto Manor Dr. North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 7 0 4 b Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 0 4 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 75 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 0 bU Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.80 0.80 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 62 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 75 Percent Grade (o) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config LT I LR I v (vph) � nZ C(m) (vph) 1243 896 v/c 0.00 0.07 95% queue length 0.01 0.22 Control Delay 7.9 9.3 LOS A A Approach Delay 9.3 Approach LOS A APPENDIX G Future "Total" AM/PM Pealc Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary worksheets -- With Mitigation -- a) Year 2003 (Phase 1) b) Year 2007 (Buildout) APPENDIX Ga ' Future "Total" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary Worksheets ' -- With Mitigation -- ' -- Year 2003 (Phase 1) -- 1 HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Frederick County Period: AM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TAMX -- with "Mitigation" (Signal) E/W St: Maranto Manor Dr. N/S St: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I 1 L T R I L T R I L T R 1 L T R I I I 1 No. Lanes I 1 I I 1 0 2 1 I I 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 LGConfig i L R I I L T I T R I Volume 152 125 I 1182 494 I 530 72 1 Lane Width 112.0 12.0 1 112.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 40 I 1 ( 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A A Thru I Thru A A Right A I Right Peds I Peds WB Left I SB Left Thru I Thru A Right I Right A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right A SB Right A I WB Right Green 7.0 41.0 24.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound L 97 1253 0.64 0.08 53.6 D 25.4 C R 634 1056 0.16 0.60 8.1 A Westbound Northbound L 629 1187 0.37 0.79 5.1 A T 2476 3139 0.26 0.79 2.6 A 3.2 A Southbound T 837 3139 0.75 0.27 33.9 C 31.9 C R 455 1106 0.19 0.41 17.1 B Intersection Delay = 17.0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Frederick County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2003 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5203TPMX -- with "Mitigation" (Signal) E/W St: Maranto Manor Dr. N/S St: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY 1 Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I No. Lanes I 1 0 1 I I 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 I 0 2 1 I LGConfig I L R I I L T I T R I Volume 1123 301 I 126 697 1 728 11 1 Lane Width 112.0 12.0 I 112.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 100 I 1 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru I Thru A Right A I Right Peds I Peds WB Left I SB Left Thru I Thru A Right I Right A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A I WB Right Green 50.0 28.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound L 692 1245 0.20 0.56 10.2 B 11.1 B R 591 1063 0.39 .0.56 11.7 B Westbound Northbound L 83 267 0.37 0.31 27.0 C T 1003 3223 0.83 0.31 34.6 C 34.3 C Southbound T 1003 3223 0.75 0.31 31.0 C 30.6 C R 1114 1114 0.01 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 28.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C APPENDIX Gb Future "Total" AM/PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis HCM Summary worksheets -- With Mitigation -- -- Year 2007 (Buildout) -- HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1c Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Frederick County Period: AM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TAMX -- with "Mitigation" (Signal) E/W St: Maranto Manor Dr. N/S St: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY 1 Eastbound I Westbound 1 Northbound I Southbound 1 I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I I I I No. Lanes I 1 I I I 0 2 1 I 0 1 I 0 0 0 I 1 2 0 LGConfig I L R I I L T I T R I Volume 151 166 1 1242 677 1 778 61 1 Lane Width 112.0 12.0 1 112.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 1 RTOR Vol I 50 1 1 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A A Thru I Thru A A Right A I Right Peds I Peds WB Left I SB Left Thru I Thru A Right I Right A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right A SB Right A I WB Right Green 7.0 35.0 30.0 Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound L 100 1280 0.61 0.08 50.6 D 23.5 C R 567 1063 0.24 0.53 11.5 B Westbound Northbound L 542 1187 0.57 0.79 15.9 B T 2476 3139 0.35 0.79 2.9 A 6.3 A Southbound T 1046 3139 0.87 0.33 36.6 D 34.9 C R 518 1084 0.14 0.48 13.3 B Intersection Delay = 19.7 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B ' Release 4.1c HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Analyst: Inter.: Rt.522/Maranto Manor Dr. ' Agency: VETTRA Co. Area Type: All other areas Date: 10/21/02 Jurisd: Frederick County Period: PM Pk.Hr. Year : Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: 5207TPMX -- with "Mitigation" (Signal) ' E/W St: Maranto Manor Dr. N/S St: Rt.522 (Front Royal Pk.) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY ' I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1 I I I No. Lanes I 1 I I 0 0 1 1 2 0 I 0 2 1 1 0 1 I 0 LGConfig I L R I I L T I T R I Volume 1114 402 1 134 1022 1 1027 11 I Lane Width 112.0 12.0 1 112.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 1 ' RTOR Vol 1 200 I 1 I 0 I Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations ' Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 EB Left A I NB Left A Thru I Thru A Right A I Right Peds I Peds WB Left I SB Left Thru I Thru A Right I Right A Peds I Peds NB Right I EB Right SB Right A 1 WB Right Green 40.0 38.0 ' Yellow 4.0 4.0 All Red 2.0 2.0 Cycle Length: 90.0 secs ' Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate ' Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound L 549 1236 0.24 0.44 15.7 B 17.5 B ' R 472 1063 0.49 0.44 18.5 B Westbound Northbound L 80 183 0.50 0.42 23.9 C T 1361 3223 0.89 0.42 32.1 C 31.9 C Southbound ' T 1361 3223 0.78 0.42 25.3 C 25.1 C R 1188 1188 0.01 1.00 0.0+ A Intersection Delay = 27.2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: AM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County ' Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: TA07TARX -- with "Mitigation" (Raised median) East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) ' Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound ' Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 490 40 3 223 0 ' Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 576 47 3 232 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5 -- -' Median Type Raised curb ' RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R ' Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 ' L T R I L T R Volume 23 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 46 0 ' Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? ' Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 ' Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I ' v (vph) 0 3 46 0 C(m) (vph) 1318 944 353 511 V/c 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.01 0.44 0.00 Control Delay 7.7 8.8 16.7 12.0 LOS A A C B ' Approach Delay 16.7 Approach LOS C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1c TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: VETTRA Co. Date Performed: 10/21/02 Analysis Time Period: PM Pk.Hr. Intersection: Tasker Rd./Rainville Rd. Jurisdiction: Frederick County Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Yr. 2007 "Total" Condition Project ID: File: TA07TPRX -- with "Mitigation" (Raised median) East/West Street: Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) North/South Street: Rainville Rd. (Rt.800) Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 374 7 1 548 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 429 8 1 608 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 -- -- 5-- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 Configuration LT R LT R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume Do 1 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50 0.50 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 112 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 5 Percent Grade M 0 0 Median Storage 1 Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I L R I v (vph) 0 1 112 z C(m) (vph) 956 1107 298 620 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 95% queue length 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.01 Control Delay 8.8 8.3 24.2 10.8 LOS A A C B Approach Delay 23.9 Approach LOS C L -111:ki:) TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. Geotechnical, Civil, Environmental, Survey, Construction Land Planning & Landscape Architecture Consultants 971 Acorn Drive, Harrisonburg, Virginia 22802 PH: (540) 434-4135 FAX: (540) 434-5841 www.triadengineering.net VIIAD ENGINEERING ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS Home Depot Regional Distribution Center Frederick County, Virginia CD-095 3 September 2002 p.T-Tl� 0F' o Di=MiME D. DMUP III S E P No. 035809 Nip 9 /3 /0 2 n CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS VIIAD ' ENGINEERING Executive Summary ' IDI, Inc. on behalf of Home Depot is developing a site west of Route 522 between Double Tollgate and Winchester as a regional distribution center. The site consists of a single large warehouse/shipping center, with parking for a large number of trucks and ' over 200 small vehicles. The design incorporates a fire pump house, a pump facility for sanitary sewer, and appropriate stormwater pipes and structures. ' The 10-year storm before development generates a flow off the site of 85.16 cfs. The 25- year storm before development generates a flow from the site of 95.18 cfs. The 100-year storm before development generates a flow off the site of 119.99 cfs. A storm water ' detention basin has been designed such that flow from the site after development for a 10-year storm will be limited to 80.55 cfs. The 25-year storm after detention allows a ' peak flow of 89.55 cfs, while the I00-year storm allows a flow of 110.00 cfs. In all cases the majority of the storm flow comes from offsite, as this site is part of a much larger drainage basin. I F F n CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING ANO ' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSUL TANTS %IIAD ENGINEERING Table of Contents 1 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT NARRATIVE..........................................1 1.1 Project Description............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Existing Site Conditions....................................................................................... 1 1.3 Adjacent Properties & Offsite Areas.................................................................. 1 1.4 Summary................................................................................................................1 2 ANALYSIS METHODS.................................................................................2 2.1 Pre -Development Conditions............................................................................... 2 2.2 Post -Development Analysis.................................................................................. 2 3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES..................................7 4 CONCLUSION..............................................................................................7 Pre -Development Hydrograplis ....................................................Appendix A Post -Development Hydrograplis ...................................................Appendix B Storm Water Control Basin Design................................................Appendix C Storm Structure Design Details .....................................................Appendix D Erosion and Sediment Control Narrative........................................Appendix E E&S Design Details....................................................................Appendix F CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS CRIAD ENGINEERING 1 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT NARRATIVE 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION IDI, Inc. on behalf of Home Depot is developing a site west of Route 522 between Double Tollgate and Winchester as a regional distribution center. The site consists of a single large warehouse/shipping center, with parking for a large number of trucks and over 200 small vehicles. The design incorporates a fire pump house, a pump facility for sanitary sewer, and appropriate stormwater pipes and structures. 1.2 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Vegetative Cover - The property contains small groves of mature hardwood trees interspersed throughout a mixture of overgrown scrub brush and thick underbrush. Please refer to Sheet C-3 of the construction plans for the existing site conditions. Topography — The topography ranges from rather flat on the central portion of the site to steep in areas of existing drainage channels. Slopes range from 1% to 30%. Drainage Patterns — There are three distinct drainage areas located on the site that discharge into Wright's Run located to the southeast of the property. There is a manmade pond on the site that discharges into one of the drainage divides ultimately entering Wright's Run. 1.3 ADJACENT PROPERTIES & OFFSITE AREAS Primarily, farmland and woodlands bound the site on three sides, with an Industrial area bouIlding the reI11aining side. The site Is located within the Eastgate Industrial Park. It is bounded on the north by commercial land owned by Global Acquisition Partners L.P. The east side is bounded by residential land, the southeast and west by agricultural land, aIld the south by residential land all Zoned RA. 1.4 SUMMARY The hydrologic routing for the pre -developed and post -developed conditions is depicted for the 10, 25, and 100-year storm events, as computed by Hydraflow I-Iydrographs, and is included in the calculations in Appendix A and Appendix B. The basin is sized to adequately detain the post -developed rates for each storm and release the storm -water below that of the appropriate pre -developed rate. The 100-year post -developed storm is included to drive the overall detention volume of the storm basin since no emergency overflow is available. Note that there is no detention for stormwater from [lie south portion of the facility. Therefore, the stormwater on the north side was overdetained in order to compensate and keep the total peak flow below pre -development conditions. In essence, over -detention on the north side "shifts" the peak flow from the north later, allowing the south portion flow to predominate. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION; LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS Page 1 I MUD ENGINEERING 2 ANALYSIS METHODS It is inappropriate to utilize the Rational Method for large non -homogeneous areas. The Home Depot site was broken into separate zones based on an evaluation of slope, runoff coefficient and drainage zone for the pre -developed state. These basins were then combined to eventually reach the total flow for the area. An algebraic sum was used for the post -developed state, as the drainage zones do not combine. A more in-depth discussion of the Rational Method is available in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and other sources. A plot of each individual hydrograph is available in the appendices. Appendix A contains the pre -development hydrographs, and Appendix B contains the post -development hydrographs. 2.1 PRE -DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS The predeveloped state has portions of several zones, with areas to the north draining to an existing pond. Wooded areas predominate, and runoff coefficients reflect this, generally ranging from 0.20 to 0.30. 2.2 POST -DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS The post -development analysis follows the same concept of utilizing sub -basins to develop the entire drainage basin. However, a larger number of zones were utilized due to the introduction of culverts, etc by the final grading plan. As much of the site as possible was induced to flow north and into the stormwater detention pond. The following pages each show a graphic indicating the total and subsidiary flows as well as the drainage zones. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS Page 2 r M M M M M M M M M 10-Year Storm 90 80 -♦- Sum of Post-Dev South 70 - -- Pre -Developed Limit Actual Flow from North Side - -Total Post -Developed Flow 50 _0 40 E 30 20 j 10 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Time (minutes) � M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 25-Year Storm 100 90 80 70 Cn 60 bU - 0 u- 40 - 30 20 10 Sum of Post-Dev South Pre -Developed Limit Actual Flow from North Side! ----,--Total Post -Developed Flow - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Time (minutes) 70 100-Year Storm 140 120 100 cn 80 _ ° 60 FL 40 - 20 - 0 0 10 20 30 40 Time (minutes) -�- Sum of Post-Dev South it Pre -Developed Limit p t Actual Flow from North Side - - Total Post -Developed Flow 50 60 70 C RIAD ENGINEERING 3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES Unless otherwise indicated, all vegetative and structural erosion and sediment control practices shown on the accompanying Plans and III the accompanying Erosion and Sediment Control Narrative will be constructed and maintained according to the minimum standards and specifications of the VIRGINIA EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL HANDBOOK. Refer to the Erosion and Sediment Control Narrative for summary and management strategies. 4 CONCLUSION The measures and strategies depicted herein and the accompanying Plans will reduce the storm -water impact on both this development and the adjoining properties. The storm - water management basin will capture all flow from developed areas. Drainage on site will be controlled by use of pavement, slopes, culverts, and overland channels designed in full accordance with engineering practice and the laws and ordinances of the commonwealth of Virginia and Frederick County. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS Page 7 VHAD ENGINEERING Appendix A Pre -Development Hydrographs CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE 4RCHI TECTURE CONSUL TANTS %RIAD ENGINEERING This appendix includes an individual hydrograph for each Of the sub -basins in the pre - development condition. Each hydrograph is presented for the 10, 25, and 100-year storms. The combined hydrograph is also shown for each storm. For each storm calculation, these combined hydrographs were used as the "baseline" case to determine the a111OL111t Of flow from a storm before any (levelopment takes place. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTIoN, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 1 Pre-Dev Off Site (Above Pond) Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 10 yrs Drainage area = 37.0 ac Intensity = 4.65 in I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF English Peak discharge = 51.63 cfs Time interval = 1 min Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Time of conc. (Tc) = 11 min Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 34,078 cult 1 - Rational - 10 Yr - Qp = 51.63 cfs / Hyd. 1 H d ro ra h Y g P Plot English Hyd. No. 2 ' Pre-Dev On Site (Above Pond) Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 7.14 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 1 min ' Drainage area = 3.7 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Intensity = 6.50 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 4 min ' I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 1,714 cult ' 2- Rational -10Yr-Qp=7.14cfs I 4 - - / Hyd. 2 i- 1 j i i ' 0 0 2 4 6 8 Time (min) ' t H dro ra h Y g p Plot ' English Hyd. No. 10 ' South Pre-Dev On Site (Plan Left) Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 10.53 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 1 min ' Drainage area = 5.4 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Intensity = 6.50 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 4 min ' I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 2,528 cuft 10 - Rational - 10 Yr - Qp = 10.53 cfs 15 1 i 10 — --- ---- ' to � / Hyd. 10 C3 i 5 i --- - ' 0 0 2 4 6 8 i Time (min) t Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 11 South Pre-Dev On Site (Plan Right) Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 10 yrs Drainage area = 8.6 ac Intensity = 6.15 in I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF 20 15 10 C3 11 English Peak discharge = 15.86 cfs Time interval = 1 min Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Time of conc. (Tc) = 5 min Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 4,759 cuft 11 - Rational - 10 Yr - Qp = 15.86 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 Time (min) in ® Hyd. 11 Hydrograph Plot English Hyd. No. 1 Pre-Dev Off Site (Above Pond) Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 57.88 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 1 min Drainage area = 37.0 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Intensity = 5.21 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 11 min I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 38,202 cuft 1 - Rational - 25 Yr - Qp = 57.88 cfs / Hyd. 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 Time (min) ' H d ro ra h Y g p Plot ' English Hyd. No. 2 ' Pre-Dev On Site (Above Pond) Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 7.94 cfs ' Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 1 min Drainage area = 3.7 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Intensity = 7.23 in Time of cons. (Tc) = 4 min ' I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 ' Total Volume = 1,904 cuft ' 2 - Rational - 25 Yr - QP = 7.94 cfs 8 -- i � 4 i _1 — - ♦ Hyd. 2 I 2- 0 0 2 4 6 8 Time (min) 1 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 10 South Pre-Dev On Site (Plan Left) Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 25 yrs Drainage area = 5.4 ac Intensity = 7.23 in I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF 1 U Q 0 English Peak discharge = 11.71 cfs Time interval = 1 min Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4 min Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 2,810 cuft 10 - Rational - 25 Yr - Qp = 11.71 cfs 2 4 Time (min) M i / Hyd. 10 H d ro ra h Plot Y g p ' English Hyd. No. 11 ' South Pre-Dev On Site (Plan Right) Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 17.65 cfs ' Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 1 min Drainage area = 8.6 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Intensity = 6.84 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 5 min ' I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 5,294 cuft ' 11 - Rational - 25 Yr - Qp = 17.65 cfs 20 - i 15 I N --- 10 / Hyd. 11 5 - 1 --- -- ---{ I 0 ' 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) ' H d ro ra h Plot Y g p ' English Hyd. No. 1 ' Pre-Dev Off Site (Above Pond) Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 73.88 cfs ' Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 1 min Drainage area = 37.0 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Intensity = 6.65 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 11 min ' I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 48,761 cult ' 1 - Rational - 100 Yr - Qp = 73.88 cfs 80 - �--------, 60----- — ---- — -1 40 - -- - - -- ---- ® Hyd. 1 I 20 - - - — i 0 i 0 5 10 15 20 25 i Time (min) t Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 2 Pre-Dev On Site (Above Pond) Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 100 yrs Drainage area = 3.7 ac Intensity = 8.91 in I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF M 4- U a English Peak discharge = 9.78 cfs Time interval = 1 min Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4 min Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 2,347 cuft 2 - Rational - 100 Yr - Qp = 9.78 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 Time (min) ---_------ --- / Hyd. 2 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 5 Post-Dev South Right Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 100 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 3 M U English Peak discharge = 53.97 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 4 Total Volume = 15,245 cuft 5 - Combine - 100 Yr - Qp = 53.97 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) Hyd. 3 / Hyd. 4 / Hyd. 5 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 10 South Pre-Dev On Site (Plan Left) Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 100 yrs Drainage area = 5.4 ac Intensity = 8.91 in I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF 1 1 U) U 0 English Peak discharge = 14,43 cfs Time interval = 1 min Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4 min Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 3,463 cuft 10 - Rational - 100 Yr - Op = 14.43 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 Time (min) d Hyd. 10 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 11 South Pre-Dev On Site (Plan Right) Hydrograph type = Rational Storm frequency = 100 yrs Drainage area = 8.6 ac Intensity = 8.49 in I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF 2 2 � 1 U English Peak discharge = 21.90 cfs Time interval = 1 min Runoff coeff. = 0.3 Time of conc. (Tc) = 5 min Reced. limb factor = 1 Total Volume = 6,571 cult 11 - Rational - 100 Yr - Qp = 21.90 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) / Hyd. 11 VRIAD ENGINEERING Appendix B Post -Development Hydrographs CIVIL, GEOTECHNIC,4L, CONSTRUCTION, LAND FLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSUL TANTS ' ENGINEERING This appendix includes an individual hydrograph for each of' the sub -basins in the post - development conditions. Each hydrograph is presented for the 10, 25, and 100-year storms. The hydrographs for a given storm were in HydroFlow to yield the total flow for ' each storm. For each storm calculation, these combined hydrographs were used as the "impact" case to determine the amOUnt Of flow from a storm after all development takes place, but before a storm water control basin is installed. Flow from the site after the ' construction of the basin and installation of the riser is presented in Appendix C. r r 11 7 11 ' CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 5 Post-Dev South Right Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 10 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 3 Cn C� English Peak discharge = 39.54 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 4 Total Volume = 11,122 cuft 5-Combine- 10 Yr - Qp = 39.54 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) Hyd. 3 / Hyd. 4 / Hyd. 5 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 8 Post-Dev South Left Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 10 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 6 4- U English Peak discharge = 40.71 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 7 Total Volume = 11,747 cuft 8- Combine -10Yr-Qp=40.71 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) Hyd. 6 / Hyd. 7 / Hyd. 8 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 11 Post-Dev On Site (Into Pond) Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 10 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 6 100- 0 60- U English Peak discharge = 92.52 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 10 Total Volume = 102,725 cuft 11 - Combine - 10Yr-Qp=92.52cfs � I I I I 30 40 50 60 ie (min) Hyd. 6 / Hyd. 10 / Hyd. 11 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 5 Post-Dev South Right Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 25 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 3 r n English Peak discharge = 43.93 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 4 Total Volume = 12,364 cuft 5- Combine -25Yr-Qp=43.93cfs Hyd. 3 / Hyd. 4 / Hyd. 5 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 8 Post-Dev South Left Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 25 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 6 rn English Peak discharge = 45.24 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 7 Total Volume = 13,059 cufl 8 - Combine - 25 Yr - Qp = 45.24 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) Hyd. 6 / Hyd. 7 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 11 Post-Dev On Site (Into Pond) Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 25 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 6 150 100 U English Peak discharge = 103.03 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 10 Total Volume = 116,577 cuft 11 - Combine - 25 Yr - Qp = 103.03 cfs 10 20 30 40 50 60 Time (min) Hyd. 6 / Hyd. 10 / Hyd. 11 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 5 Post-Dev South Right Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 100 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 3 I' 5( 4( 3( 2( 1( English Peak discharge = 53.97 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 4 Total Volume = 15,245 cuft 5 - Combine - 100 Yr - Qp = 53.97 cfs 0 i 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time (min) Hyd. 3 / Hyd. 4 / Hyd. 5 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 8 Post-Dev South Left Final Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 100 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 6 U 0 English Peak discharge = 55.59 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 7 Total Volume = 16,108 cuft 8 - Combine - 100 Yr - Qp = 55.59 cfs 0 2 4 6 8 10 Hyd. 6 / Hyd. 7 / Hyd. 8 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 11 Post-Dev On Site (Into Pond) Hydrograph type = Combine Storm frequency = 100 yrs 1 st inflow hyd. No. = 6 English Peak discharge = 127.35 cfs Time interval = 1 min 2nd inflow hyd. No.= 10 Total Volume = 150,043 cuft 100 Yr - Qp = 127.35 cfs I i i 30 40 50 60 min) -' Hyd. 6 / Hyd. 10 / Hyd. 11 %IIAD ENGINEERING Appendix C Storm Water Control Basin Design CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS %IIAD ENGINEERING Included in this section are the supporting calculations for the storm water control basin. In order to minimize soil disturbances, the existing pond has been utilized as the storm water control basin. Given the nature of the existing topographical features in the vicinity of the proposed basin and the location of the road, an emergency spillway is not provided. The basin is sized to adequately detain the 100-yr storm event without overtopping the earthen berm. However, in the event of a storm event exceeding the 100-year occurrence, a weir and 60" pipe have been provided to allow an emergency bypass. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND L ANOSCAPE 4RCHI TECTURE CONSUL TANTS H d ro ra h Y g p Plot ' English Hyd. No. 2 ' 10-year storm Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 16.55 cfs ' Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 1 min Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Reservoir name = Pond 08-19 Max. Elevation = 677.96 ft Max. Storage = 69,859 cult ' storage Indication method used. Total Volume = 84,893 cult 2 - Reservoir - 10 Yr - Qp = 16.55 cfs 100 - I 80 / Hyd. 1 60 — - - - - ----i U 40 ' 20 - -- -- / Hyd. 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 Time (hrs) t 1 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 2 10-year storm Hydrograph type = Reservoir Storm frequency = 10 yrs Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Max. Elevation = 677.96 ft Storage Indication method used. English Peak discharge = 16.55 cfs Time interval = 1 min Reservoir name = Pond 08-19 Max. Storage = 69,859 cult Total Volume = 84,893 cuft 2 - Reservoir - 10 Yr - Max. El. = 677.96 ft 678.0 677.1 a� w 676. i i I i I I I 0 1 2 3 Time (hrs) Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 4 25-year storm Hydrograph type = Reservoir Storm frequency = 25 yrs Inflow hyd. No. = 3 Max. Elevation = 678.16 ft Storage Indication method used Peak discharge Time interval Reservoir name Max. Storage English = 18.04 cfs = 1 min = Pond 08-19 = 79,595 cult Total Volume = 98,747 cuft I cfs 5 / Hyd. 3 / Hyd. 4 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 4 25-year storm Hydrograph type = Reservoir Storm frequency = 25 yrs Inflow hyd. No. = 3 Max. Elevation = 678.16 ft Peak discharge Time interval Reservoir name Max. Storage English = 18.04 cfs = 1 min = Pond 08-19 = 79,595 cult Storage Indication method used. Total Volume = 98,747 cult Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 6 100-year storm Hydrograph type = Reservoir Storm frequency = 100 yrs Inflow hyd. No. = 5 Max. Elevation = 678.63 ft Storage Indication method used 1 4— U 0 English Peak discharge = 21.94 cfs Time interval = 1 min Reservoir name = Pond 08-19 Max. Storage = 104,005 cult Total Volume = 132,213 cull 6 - Reservoir - 100 Yr - Qp = 21.94 cfs 1 2 Time (hrs) 3 4 5 / Hyd. 5 / Hyd. 6 Hydrograph Plot Hyd. No. 6 100-year storm Hydrograph type = Reservoir Storm frequency = 100 yrs Inflow hyd. No. = 5 Max. Elevation = 678.63 ft Storage Indication method used. English Peak discharge = 21.94 cfs Time interval = 1 min Reservoir name = Pond 08-19 Max. Storage = 104,005 cuft Total Volume = 132,213 cuft 6 - Reservoir - 100 Yr - Max. El. = 678.63 ft 679. MIR V 677. a� w 677. 676. 675. 0 1 2 3 4 5 Time (hrs) 8 Ai ire Pond 08-19 100000 200000 Storage (cult) 300000 400000 0 Cm CO Cn Pond 08-19 0 10 20 30 40 50 Discharge (cfs) / Total Cult' A Culv B / Cult' C r., Cult' D Weir A Weir B / Weir C / Weir D Reservoir Report Reservoir No. 1 - Pond 08-19 Pond Data Pond storage is based on known contour areas Stage / Storage Table Stage Elevation ft ft 0.00 675.79 0.21 676.00 2.21 678.00 4.21 680.00 6.21 682.00 Contour area Incr. Storage Total storage sqft cult cuft 19,364 0 0 23,410 4,491 4,491 43,284 66,694 71,185 61,516 104,800 175,985 79,400 140,916 316,901 Culvert / Orifice Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise in = 60.0 3.0 6.0 18.0 Span in = 60.0 24.0 24.0 18.0 No. Barrels = 1 2 3 1 Invert El. ft = 676.00 676.00 676.50 678.20 Length ft = 390.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Slope % = 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .013 Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multi -Stage = ----- Yes Yes Yes Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] Crest Len ft = 22.0 0.0 0.0 Crest El. ft = 682.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Coeff. = 3.00 0.00 0.00 Eqn. Exp. = 1.50 0.00 0.00 Multi -Stage = No No No Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 ft Page 1 English [D] 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 No Note: All outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage / Storage / Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C Clv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Discharge ft cuft ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 0.00 0 675.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- 0.00 0.21 4,491 676.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- 0.00 2.21 71,185 678.00 35.60 4.19 12.58 0.00 0.00 - --- --- 16.77 4.21 175,985 680.00 115.95 6.88 20.63 8.72 0.00 - - --- --- 36.23 6.21 316,901 682.00 158.36 9.12 27.35 14.86 0.00 --- --- --- 51.32 HAD ENGINEERING Appendix D Storm Structure Design Details CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONS TRUCTIOi%; LAND PLANNING AND L4NDSC,4FE ARCHITECTURE CONSUL TANTS VHAD ENGINEERING This section includes details of each of the storm sewers utilized in file project using Hydrograph StornlSewer. All sewers are designed with a minimum 10-year design storm in perspective. The overflow pipes from the storm pond are sized to transport the 100- year storm with reserve. Each manhole was sized using the *Permissible Angle tables from Hanson Pipe & Products, in industry standard. Information included in this section shows the overall layout of the system and the drainage zones that feed each structure, a plan of each of the six runs from SlornlSewer, summary tables, and the output hydrographs. There are no hydrographs for the roof drainage. Calculations were developed that showed that the roof drained 0.03994 cfs per linear foot with a concentration time of 3 minutes. This factor was multiplied by the linear feet of roof feeding to a particular drain head to determine the total flow in the pipe. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS F-urs 1 0 LEL, EN I:�, � I � I C I LJ L 1J SALE- 1: 150' m m m = m STORM STRUCTURE SCHEDULE STR # TYPE TOP INVERT DI-3B (L-6' D=48") 688.10 67914 (STR //2) i2 DI- 1 (D- k8 ") 687.60 680.31 (STR //3) J/3 DI- 1 (D=48") 687.60 681.31 (STR //4) rJ 4 DI- 1 (D=48") 687.60 682.31 (STR //5) JJ5 DI- 1 (D=48") 687.00 683.95 //6 DI-3B (L=6' D=72") 687.53 679.17 (STR //7) 117 DI- 1 686.80 680.1 1 (STR //8) (D=72") 68011 (STR #20) #8 DI- 1 (D=60' ) 686.80 68,.11 (STR //9) J/9 D1-1 (D=60") 686.80 6e2.11 (STR #10) JJ10 DI-3B (L=6' D=48") 687.30 684.72 JJ 1 1 (D MH 687.93 680 95 (R/D) lit'17_ DI-3C (L=6' D=60") 686.98 679.06 (SIR /(13) #1 3 (D M60) 687.93 679 68 (R/D) JJ 14 DI- 1 (D=60") 686.80 680.44 (STR N 15) J/15 DI- 1 686.80 681.44 (STR y16) (D=84") 681.44 (STR #25) JJ 16 DI- 1 686.80 682.44 (STR // 17) (D=84") 682.44 (STR 1121) Jr17 DI-3B 690. 10 686.45 (STR #18) r (L=6' D-48..) 686.45 (STR //19) Jr 18 DI-3B (L=6' D=48") 692.40 690.44 (STR #20) # 19 DI-313 (L=6' D=48") 690.35 686.84 #20 DI-3B (L=6 D=48") 692.45 690.84 #21 DI-3B (L=6' D=60") 689.38 684.19 (STR #22) It' 22 MH (D =48 ") 691.06 685.54 (SIR #23) JJ23 DI-313 (L=6' D=48") 691.29 68592 (SIR #24) JJ24 (L=61 D g48") 692.52 687.15 #25 f\MH (D=84") 687.93 681.14 (R/D) DI-3C 671.47 S(sTR / z7�#26 L=6' DC ( ) 683.64 680.00 (SIR28 675.00 (((STR /29 rr77 DI-3B (L=6' D=60") 689.00 673.60 (F.E.S. //5) ri28 DI-3C (L=6' D=48") 683.64 681.25 J129 Iv1H (D=84") 687.93 678 60 (R/D) DI-3C 679.56 R 31 #30 L=6' D= 1 26" 683.64 679.56 679.56 R �32 NIR #31 DI-3C (L=6' D=72") 683.64 682.06 JJ32 (L=61 D 84") 686.25 681,98 JJ33 MH (D=72") 687.93 682.26 (R/D) F.E.S. JJ 1 ES- 1 -- 679 00 F.E.S. JJ2 ES- 1 -- 679.00 F.E.S. JJ3 ES-1 -- 679.00 F.E.S. //4 ES-1 -- 679.00 F.E.S. JJ5 ES- 1 -- 675.00 TYPE III COVERS (1 " OPENINGS) ALL DI-7 INLETS SHALL HAVE GRATE 'A' STORM SEWER SCHEDULE FROM TO CULVERT TYPE SIZE (in.) LENGTH (fL.) SLOPE M F.E.S. JJ1 STR JJ1 Ji1 CLPII 27" 23.00 0.61 STR JJ 1 STR JJ2 JJ2 Rcp CL III 24 1 1 7.28 1.00 STIR //2 STR JJ3 il3 CIL RCP 24' 200.00 0.50 STR i/3 STR JJ4 JJ4 CL RCP 18" 200.00 0.50 STR JJ4 STR JJ5 JJ5 CIL PII 18" 81.80 2.00 F.E.S. J/2 STR JJ6 Jl6 CL RCP 36" 33.00 0.52 STR JJ6 STR JJ7 Ji7 Rcp CILIII 36 188.21 0.50 STR J/7 STR JJ8 JJ8 Rcp CILIII 33" 200.00 0.50 STR JJ8 STR J{9 Jig CIL RCP 30" 200.00 0.50 STR #9 STR #10 #10 RCP CL II 18" 84.99 3.07 STR JJ7 STR JJ 1 1 JJ 1 1 CL RCP 36" 83.76 1.00 F.E.S. JJ3 STR /112 Ji14 CL RCP 30„ 12.00 0.50 STR JJ 12 STR JJ 13 # 15 CL PII 30" 125.00 0.50 F.E.S. JJ4 STR J/14 J/18 RCPII 48" 155.00 0.93 STR iJ 14 STR JJ 15 Ji 19 RCP CL III 36" 200.00 0.50 STR JJ 15 STR JJ 16 JJ20 CL RCP 33" 200.00 0.50 STR Ji 1 6 STR JJ 1 7 1121 RCP CL 111 24" 200.57 2.00 STR JJ 1 7 STIR JJ 1 8 #22 RCP CL III 18" 195.24 2.04 STR JJ 1 8 STR #20 JJ23 RCP CL III 18" 81.77 0.49 STR #17 STIR #19 #24 RCP CL III 18" 82.96 0.47 STR JJ16 STR JJ21 J/25 CIL RCP 30" 174.71 1.00 STR J/21 STR 1122 JJ26 CL PII RC '18" 135.00 1.00 STIR #22 STR JJ23 JJ27 Rc CL PII 18" 37.56 1.00 STR JJ23 STR i/24 J/28 CL RCP 18" 121.00 1.00 STR /J 15 STR JJ25 #31 RCP CL Ill 42" 83.76 0.50 STR JJ26 STR Ji2.7 JJ32 RCP CILIII 30" 426.57 0.50 STR JJ27 F.E.S. /J5 JJ42 RCP CILIII 30" 280.00 0.50 STR JJ26 STR JJ28 JJ33 RCP CL III 24" 250.00 0.50 STR JJ26 STR //29 Ji34 RCP CL III 42" 180.00 2.00 STR JJ30 STR JJ31 J/37 C� PII 48" 250.00 1.00 STR #30 STR JJ32 JJ38 RCPCL u 42" 242.15 1.00 STR #30 STR JJ33 #39 RCP CL III 36" 180.00 1.50 STIR J/ 1 1 - - J112 SDR35 5 24" 200.00 1.00 JJ 1 2A s ' PVC 18" 87.00 1.00 STR /i 1 1 -- /i 13 SDR c ' 36" 87.00 1.00 STR JJ 13 -- JJ16 SDR 35 PVC 24" 190.00 0.65 STR JJ13 -- J/17 SDR Pvcs 24" 200.00 0.65 STR JJ25 -- JJ30 SDR 35 PVC 30" 106.00 0.50 S-TR JJ25 __ JJ29 SDR 35 Pvc 33" 200.00 0.50 -- -- JJ29A 5 SDR35 27 142.00 0.50 STR //29 -- J/35 SDR355 30" 277.00 2.00 STR #2.9 -- #36 SPv3 5 30" 448.00 1.25 STR J 33 J -- J{40 SDR 35 PVC 30" 382.00 0.75 STR JJ33 -- # 4 1 S PVC 5 30" 343.00 0.75 STR JJ32 STR JJ35 Jla3 C� PII 60" 200.00 0.50 STR JJ35 STR JJ36 JJ44 Rcp CIL PII 60" 370.00 0.50 STR JJ36 STR JJ37 Ji45 Rcp CIL PII 60" 175.00 0.50 STR JJ37 STR JJ38 JJ46 RCP CILIII 60" 130.00 0.50 STR JJ38 STR {J39 J147 CICPII 60" 400.00 0.50 STR #39 STR #40 /J48 CL RCP II 60" 390.00 0.50 m m m Hydraflow Plan View 1 Project file: Run #1-rev.stm I OF file: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF I No. Lines: 5 108-28-2002 Hydraflow Storm Sewer Inventory Report Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-loss Inlet/ line length angle type Q area coeff time El Dn slope El Up size type value coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) N (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ft) 1 End 23.0 0.0 MH 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.00 0.61 679.14 27 Cir 0.013 0.45 687.60 Culvert #1 (to pond) 2 1 117.3 26.0 MH 4.63 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.14 1.00 680.31 24 Cir 0.013 0.15 687.60 Culvert #2 3 2 200.0 4.0 MH 5.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.31 0.50 681.31 24 Cir 0.013 0.15 687.60 Culvert #3 4 3 200.0 0.0 MH 3.54 0.00 0.00 0.0 681.31 0.50 682.31 18 Cir 0.013 0.75 687.60 Culvert #4 5 4 81.8 -41.0 MH 3.12 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.31 2.00 683.95 18 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.00 Culvert #5 Project File: Run #1-rev.stm I-D-F File: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Total number of lines: 5 Date: 08-28-2002 r= it r= m r r r r� �r r r rr r� r ■r r� r Hydraflow Plan View 5 \3 7 Project file: Run #2-rev.stm OF file: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF No. Lines: 9 08-28-2002 Hydraflow Storm Sewer Inventory Report M M M M M M r M Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-loss Inlet/ line length angle type Q area coeff time El Dn slope El Up size type value coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) M (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ft) 1 End 33.0 0.0 MH 2.52 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.00 0.52 679.17 36 Cir 0.013 0.45 687.03 Culvert #6 2 1 188.2 22.0 MH 6.09 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.17 0.50 680.11 36 Cir 0.013 0.85 686.80 Culvert #7 3 2 200.0 26.0 MH 6.09 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.11 0.50 681.11 33 Cir 0.013 0.15 686.80 Culvert #8 4 3 200.0 0.0 MH 6.80 0.00 0.00 0.0 681.11 0.50 682.11 30 Cir 0.013 0.85 686.80 Culvert #9 5 2 83.8 -64.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.11 1.00 680.95 36 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #11 6 5 200.0 90.0 MH 7.89 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.95 1.00 682.95 24 Cir 0.009 0.15 687.93 Culvert #12 7 6 87.0 0.0 MH 3.97 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.95 1.00 683.82 18 Cir 0.009 1.00 687.93 Culvert #12A 8 5 87.0 -90.0 MH 3.97 0.00 0.00 0.0 683.82 1.00 684.69 18 Cir 0.009 1.00 687.93 Culvert #13 9 4 85.0 -68.0 MH 5.50 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.11 3.07 684.72 18 Cir 0.013 1.00 686.80 Culvert #10 Project File: Run ""2-rev.stm I-D-F File: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Total number of lines: 9 Date: 08-28-2002 m m m m r m Hydraflow Plan View Project file: Run #3-rev.stm I IDF file: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF No. Lines: 15 08-28-2002 M Hydraflow Storm Sewer Inventory Report r Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Dnstr Line Deft Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-loss Inlet/ line length angle type Q area coeff time El Dn slope El Up size type value coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cis) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) N (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ft) 1 End 155.0 0.0 MH 4.63 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.00 0.93 680.44 48 Cir 0.013 0.45 686.80 Culvert #18 2 1 200.0 -23.0 MH 5.63 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.44 0.50 681.44 36 Cir 0.013 1.00 686.80 Culvert #19 3 2 200.0 0.0 MH 5.63 0.00 0.00 0.0 681.44 0.50 682.44 33 Cir 0.013 0.75 686.80 Culvert #20 4 3 200.6 -38.0 MH 2.86 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.44 2.00 686.45 24 Cir 0.013 1.00 692.00 Culvert #21 5 4 195.2 3.0 MH 1.30 0.00 0.00 0.0 686.45 2.04 690.44 18 Cir 0.013 1.00 695.00 Culvert #22 6 3 174.7 28.0 MH 3.66 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.44 1.00 684.19 30 Cir 0.013 0.45 689.38 Culvert #25 7 2 83.8 90.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.72 0.50 681.14 42 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert 1"31 8 7 200.0 -90.0 MH 7.99 0.00 0.00 0.0 681.14 0.50 682.14 33 Cir 0.009 0.15 687.93 Culvert #29 9 8 142.0 0.0 MH 6.23 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.14 0.50 682.85 27 Cir 0.009 1.00 687.93 Culvert #29A 10 6 135.0 -28.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 684.19 1.00 685.54 18 Cir 0.009 0.45 691.06 Culvert #26 11 7 106.0 90.0 MH 4.73 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.61 0.50 683.14 30 Cir 0.009 1.00 667.93 Culvert #30 12 10 38.0 21.0 MH 2.64 0.00 0.00 0.0 685.54 1.00 685.92 18 Cir 0.013 0.85 691.29 Culvert #27 13 12 123.0 68.0 MH 2.52 0.00 0.00 0.0 685.92 1.00 687.15 18 Cir 0.013 1.00 692.52 Culvert #28 14 4 83.0 90.0 MH 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.0 686.45 0.47 686.84 18 Cir 0.013 1.00 695.00 Culvert #24 15 5 81.8 90.0 MH 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.0 690.44 0.49 690.84 18 Cir 0.013 1.00 698.00 Culvert #23 Project File: Run #3-rev.stm I-D-F File: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Total number of lines: 15 Date: 08-30-2002 I, m m ms Hydraflow Plan View 3 L 2 4 • Project file: Run #4-rev.stm IDF file: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF No. Lines: 4 08-28-2002 M Hydraflow Storm Sewer Inventory Report M M M M M Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Dnstr Line Deft Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-loss Inlet/ line length angle type Q area coeff time EI Dn slope EI Up size type value coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ff) N (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ff) 1 End 12.0 0.0 MH 4.81 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.00 0.50 679.06 30 Cir 0.013 0.15 686.48 Culvert #14 2 1 125.0 0.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.06 0.50 679.68 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert 015 3 2 260.0 -90.0 MH 10.87 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.68 0.65 681.37 24 Cir 0.009 1.00 687.93 Culvert #17 4 2 190.0 90.0 MH 8.08 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.68 0.65 680.91 24 Cir 0.009 1.00 687.93 Culvert #16 Project File: Run #4-rev.stm I-D-F File: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Total number of lines: 4 Date: 08-28-2002 Ml m m m m m m M Hydraf low Plan View Project file: CD095 -Run #5-rev.stm I OF file: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF I No. Lines: 7 108-30-2002 Hydraflow Storm Sewer Inventory Report Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Dnstr Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-loss Inlet/ line length angle type Q area coeff time El Dn slope El Up size type value coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) N (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ft) 1 End 100.0 0.0 MH 12.89 0.00 0.00 0.0 649.00 5.00 654.00 48 Cir 0.013 1.00 683.64 Culvert #49 2 1 426.6 -81.0 MH 7.97 0.00 0.00 0.0 671.47 0.50 673.60 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 689.00 Culvert #32 3 1 250.0 90.0 MH 8.43 0.00 0.00 0.0 680.00 0.50 681.25 24 Cir 0.013 1.00 683.64 Culvert #33 4 1 180.0 0.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 675.00 2.00 678.60 42 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #34 5 4 277.0 -90.0 MH 11.57 0.00 0.00 0.0 678.60 2.00 684.14 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #35 6 4 448.0 90.0 MH 18.39 0.00 0.00 0.0 678.60 1.25 684.20 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #36 7 2 280.0 81.0 MH 12.18 0.00 0.00 0.0 673.60 0.50 675.00 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 686.00 Culvert #42 Project File: CDO95 - Run #5-rev.stm I-D-F File: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Total number of lines: 7 Date: 08-30-2002 rr rr r rr rr rr Hydraflow Plan View r �r �r rr r �r rr r rr rr �r rr rr • 1 12 5 2 1 4 , 1A ,'1,3 6 \ 101 • 10 8 /9 Project file: CD095 - Run 96.stm OF file: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF No. Lines: 12 708-30-2002 Hydraflow Storm Sewer Inventory Report Page 1 Line Alignment Flow Data Physical Data Line ID No. Line Defl Junc Known Drng Runoff Inlet Invert Line Invert Line Line N J-loss Inlet/ 7Dnstr line length angle type Q area coeff time El Dn slope El Up size type value coeff Rim El No. (ft) (deg) (cfs) (ac) (C) (min) (ft) N (ft) (in) (n) (K) (ft) 1 End 100.0 0.0 MH 9.91 0.00 0.00 0.0 646.00 19.25 665.25 72 Cir 0.013 1.00 683.64 Vertical Pipe 2 1 250.0 -90.0 MH 8.43 0.00 0.00 0.0 676.48 1.00 678.98 24 Cir 0.013 1.00 683.64 Culvert #37 3 1 242.1 77.0 MH 7.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 665.25 1.00 667.67 66 Cir 0.013 0.45 686.25 Culvert #38 4 1 180.0 0.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 679.56 1.50 682.26 36 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #39 5 4 382.0 -90.0 MH 15.76 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.26 0.75 685.13 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #40 6 4 343.0 90.0 MH 14.20 0.00 0.00 0.0 682.26 0.75 684.83 30 Cir 0.013 1.00 687.93 Culvert #41 7 3 200.0 -28.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 667.67 0.50 668.67 60 Cir 0.013 0.75 690.00 Culvert #43 8 7 370.0 -38.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 668.67 0.50 670.52 60 Cir 0.013 0.75 690.00 Culvert #44 9 8 175.0 -50.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 670.52 0.50 671.39 60 Cir 0.013 0.85 690.00 Culvert #45 10 9 130.0 -54.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 671.39 0.50 672.04 60 Cir 0.013 0.15 690.00 Culvert #46 11 10 400.0 -9.0 MH 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 672.04 0.50 674.04 60 Cir 0.013 0.15 690.00 Culvert #47 12 11 390.0 -3.0 MH 23.56 0.00 0.00 0.0 674.04 0.50 675.99 60 Cir 0.013 1.00 690.00 Culvert #47 Project File: CDO95 - Run #6.stm I-D-F File: Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Total number of lines: 12 Date: 08-30-2002 Hydrograph Plot English Hyd. No. 9 Original Zone 1 to Pass Through Hydrograph type = Rational Peak discharge = 12.18 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 1 min Drainage area = 13.2 ac Runoff coeff. = 0.23 Intensity = 4.00 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 15 min I-D-F Curve = Frederick Co.-rev.IDF Reced. limb factor = 1 1 Cn w— U Total Volume = 10,959 cuft 9 - Rational - 10 Yr - Qp = 12.18 cfs 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Time (min) / Hyd. 9 Cross Section Cross Section for Circular Channel Project Description Project File \\serverl\civildocs\cd095\calcs\pipefl-1.fm2 Worksheet STR#26 Outfall Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.010000 ftfft Depth 1.68 ft Diameter 48.00 in Discharge 52.89 cfs 1 0902 02:12:19:04 PM 1.68 ft 1 VD H 1 NTS 48.00 in FlowMaster v5.17 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 or 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Project File \\serverl\civildocs\cd095\calcs\pipefl-1.fm2 Worksheet STR#26 Outfall Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 48.00 in Discharge 52.89 cfs Results Depth 1.68 ft Flow Area 5.01 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.64 ft Top Width 3.95 ft Critical Depth 2.19 ft Percent Full 42.00 Critical Slope 0.004041 fUft Velocity 10.56 ft/s Velocity Head 1.73 ft Specific Energy 3.41 ft Froude Number 1.65 Maximum Discharge 154.51 cfs Full Flow Capacity 143.64 cfs Full Flow Slope 0.001356 fUft Flow is supercritical. 011129/02 02:19:12 PM FlowMaster v5.17 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Cross Section Cross Section for Triangular Channel Project Description Project File c:\windows\desktop\cd095.fm2 Worksheet Northwest curb and gutter Flow Element Triangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Depth 0.47 ft Left Side Slope 0.010000 H : V Right Side Slope 12.000000 H : V Discharge 5.50 cfs 0.47 ft 1 VD H 1 NTS 02 05:12:1:12:19 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 FlowMaster v5.17 Page 1 of 1 Worksheet Worksheet for Triangular Channel ' Project Description Project File c:\windows\desktop\cd095.fm2 Worksheet Northwest curb and gutter ' Flow Element Triangular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Channel Depth Input Data ' Mannings Coefficient 0.013 Channel Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Left Side Slope 0.010000 H : V ' Right Side Slope 12.000000 H : V Discharge 5.50 cfs IResults Depth 0.47 ft Flow Area 1.33 ft2 ' Wetted Perimeter 6.14 ft Top Width 5.66 ft Critical Depth 0.55 ft ' Critical Slope 0.004217 ft/ft Velocity 4.13 ft/s ' Velocity Head Specific Energy 0.26 0.74 ft ft Froude Number 1.50 Flow is supercritical. 08/27/02 05:12:26 PM FlowMasler v5.17 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 F C C E E 0 L 11 V IIAD ENGINEERING Appendix: E Erosion and Sediment Control Narrative CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLAIvN/NG AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSUL TANTS C EIIAD ' ENGINEERING ' This section includes the Erosion and Sediment Control Narrative. It is not complete without the accompanying plan sheet. CIVIL, GEOTFCHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS Erosion and Sediment ControlNarrative FOR t Home Depot Import Distribution Center ' Date: August 30, 2002 ' Project No. CD-095 1 ' PREPARED BY: �:11AD ' ENGINEERING CIVIL, EVVIRONNEl\'TAL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONS TRUCTIOPI, Ld,VO FLANNIA'G AND LA1VDSCAPE ARCHITECTURF_ CONSULTANTS 97/ ACORN DRIVE h',1' RISONBURG, VIRGINIA 22,30/ ' TELE 54 0. 4 34. 4 /35 FAx 54 0. 4 34. 584 / t �� , I This narrative describes the erosion and sediment control measures to be constructed at the proposed site located on the southerly terminus of Rainville Road within the Eastgate Industrial Park located in the County of Frederick, Virginia. Project Description The project consists of construction of a warehouse, roadways, parking, storm and sanitary sewers, water lines and other items associated with the proposed industrial development. The property to be developed is approximately 81.86 acres. Existing Site Condition Vegetative Cover — The property contains small groves of mature hardwood trees interspersed throughout a mixture of overgrown scrub brush and thick underbrush. Please refer to Sheet C-3 of the construction plans for the existing site conditions. Topography — The topography ranges from rather flat on the central portion of the site to steep in areas of existing drainage channels. Slopes range from 1 % to 30%. Drainage Patterns — There are three distinct drainage areas located on the site that discharge into Wright's Run located to the southeast of the property. There is a manmade pond on the site that discharges into one of the drainage divides ultimately entering Wright's Run. Please see the Engineering Report for details of the drainage divides. Adjacent Properties The site is located within the Eastgate Industrial Park. It is bounded on the north by commercial land owned by Global Acquisition Partners L.P. The east side is bounded by residential land, the southeast and west by agricultural land, and the south by residential land all zoned RA. Soils According to the Frederick County Soil Survey prepared by the Soil Conservation Service, the site soils consist of mapping unit 9B (Clearbrook Channery silt loam), and mapping units 41 C, and 41 D (Weikert-Berks channery silt loams of varying slope). The Clearbrook soil is poorly drained, while the Weikert-Berks soils are well drained. The Clearbrook soil has moderately slow permeability, while the Weikert-Berks soils have moderately rapid permeability. Surface runoff is medium to rapid for all soil types. Erosion is a concern for all soil types in areas of soil disturbance. Depth to bedrock (typically less than 40") is the primary limitation to development for these soil types. Critical Erosion Areas The critical erosion areas of the site consist of 2:1 cut slopes, 3:1 cut and fill slopes and the fill areas near the three tributaries. The accompanying E&S design shown on the plans will address these areas via accepted Erosion and Sediment Control Measures Unless otherwise noted, the structural and vegetative practices shall be constructed and maintained according to the Minimum Standards of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law, Regulations and Certification Regulations and Specifications outlined in the latest edition of k the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. The following summary(s) are for quick reference only and do not preclude any requirements or standards listed in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Also, other measures not specifically listed here or on the construction plans may be required to keep the site within regulatory compliance during construction. The need for such items may not be evident until the beginning of construction. The Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control Administrator will determine the need for additional erosion and sediment control measures. STRUCTURAL PRACTICES Temporary Construction Entrance - 3.02 Temporary construction entrances shall be constructed as shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. The entrances shall be maintained in a condition that prevents tracking or flow of mud onto public rights -of -way. This may require periodic top dressing with additional stone or washing and reworking of existing stones as conditions demand and repair and/or clean -out of any structures used to trap sediment. All materials spilled, dropped, washed or tracked from vehicles onto roadways or into storm drains must be removed immediately. During wet weather conditions, construction vehicle drivers will be required to wash their wheels prior to entering the highway. During the washing process, the contractor shall ensure that the runoff created by the washing process is passed through one of the sediment removing devices such as a section of silt fence. Water for washing operations shall be hauled to the site or shall be acquired from a hydrant installed at the site. This hydrant shall be installed in accordance with the Frederick County specifications. The use of water trucks to remove materials dropped, washed or tracked onto the roadways will not be permitted under any circumstances. 2. Construction Road Stabilization - 3.03 Construction road stabilization shall be utilized wherever stone -based roads or parking areas are to be constructed, whether permanent or temporary, for use by construction traffic. Treated areas are likely to require periodic top dressing with new gravel. Seeded areas adjacent to road and parking areas shall be check periodically to ensure a vigorous stand of vegetation is maintained. Roadside ditched and drainage structures shall be checked regularly to ensure they do not become clogged with silt or other debris. 3. Silt Fence Barriers - 3.05 Silt fence barriers shall be installed at locations shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to filter sediment -laden runoff and decrease the velocity of sheet flows and low -to -moderate level channel flows. Wire reinforcement shall be used for all silt fence barriers. 4. Storm Drain Inlet Protection - 3.07 All storm drain inlets shall be protected during construction in order to prevent sediment from entering storm drainage systems prior to permanent stabilization of the disturbed area. Inlet protection shall be provided for all storm inlets as shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. 5. Temporary Diversion Dike - 3.09 Temporary diversion dikes shall be constructed at locations shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan in such a manner to facilitate positive drainage to the Sediment 4 Basins and Sediment Traps. Temporary diversion dikes shall also be utilized to divert storm run-off from upslope drainage areas away from unprotected disturbed areas and slopes to a stabilized outlet. Upon termination of these dikes, positive drainage to the Sediment Basins shall be maintained. 6. Temporary Sediment Trap - 3.13 Temporary sediment traps shall be constructed at the locations shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and in accordance with the construction details shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Details. The temporary sediment traps shall detain sediment -laden runoff from disturbed areas long enough to allow the majority of the sediment to settle out. Note that the outlet of each sediment trap is further protected by two sections of silt fence. 7. Temporary Sediment Basin - 3.14 Temporary sediment basins shall be constructed at the locations shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. The temporary sediment basins shall remain in place after construction and final site stabilization are completed to serve as permanent stormwater management structures. Refer to the Erosion and Sediment Control Details for outlet design and retrofitting. 8. Outlet Protection - 3.18 All storm pipe outlets shall be protected with a stone apron per specifications outlined in the latest edition of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. When installed properly, outlet protection should require very little maintenance. However, it shall be inspected periodically for scour from high flows. Care must be taken to properly control sediment -laden construction runoff draining to the outlet protection until all up - gradient areas have been fully stabilized. 9. Rock Check Dams — 3.20 Rock check dams shall be constructed adjacent to diversion dikes where high velocity - high quantity flows may occur. These check dams shall serve to dissipate the concentrated flows and protect the diversion dikes. The check dams shall be regularly inspected and accumulated silt shall be removed. 10. Surface Roughening - 3.29 All areas in which grading takes place and a slope greater than or equal to a 3:1 slope is constructed shall be surface roughened by stair step grading, grooving, furrowing, or tracking. 11. Soil Stabilization Blankets and Matting - 3.36 LandLok TRM 435 matting or an approved equivalent shall be installed in all ditch sections shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and in accordance with the detail shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Details. 12. Tree Preservation and Protection — 3.38 PROTECTION OF DESIRABLE TREES FROM MECHANICAL AND OTHER INJURY DURING LAND DISTURBING AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED. Contractor shall refer to the latest edition of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Section 3.38 and be intimately familiar with the stresses 5 � I � I �I J placed on existing trees due to construction activities. 13. Dust Control - 3.39 The contractor shall take measures to reduce the surface and air movement of dust, which may present health hazards, traffic safety problems or harm animal and plant life during land disturbing and construction activities. GRASS ESTABLISHMENT Topsoil Stockpile - 3.30 Topsoil shall be stripped from areas to be graded and stockpiled for future use. The Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control Administrator shall approve stockpile locations. Stockpiles shall be temporarily seeded and protected with silt fence. When the topsoil is spread over the graded areas, it shall be placed in 2-4 inch compacted lifts. Topsoil hauled offsite shall be disposed of in an approved area as directed by the Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control Administrator. 2. Temporary Seeding - 3.31 The topsoil stockpiles and all areas to be rough graded during the course of the project shall be immediately seeded with temporary vegetation upon completion of grading operations. The appropriate seed mixture will be dependent upon the time of year it is to be sown. The typical seed mixture specification is shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Details. The Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control Administrator must approve any deviation from these mixtures. NOTE: Stabilization measures shall be applied to earthen structures such as dams, dikes, diversions, and sediment basin embankments immediately after construction of the said structure. 3. Permanent Seeding - 3.32 Permanent seeding shall be completed within seven days from achieving final grade of the site. MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES The following guidelines shall be utilized in the planning of construction: Temporary diversion dikes, the temporary sediment traps, the temporary sediment basins, silt fence, the construction entrance and other measures intended to remove sediment shall be constructed as a first step in the land disturbing activity and shall be functional before up slope land is disturbed, These measures shall also be stabilized with vegetation prior to up slope land disturbance. 2. The contractor shall install inlet protection and outlet protection for all storm utilities immediately after installation of said structures to prevent sediment from collecting in the said structures and being deposited down stream. Rock check dams shall be constructed during this step. 3. Construction shall be sequenced so that grading operations can begin and end as quickly as possible. 6 4. Temporary seeding and other stabilization shall follow immediately after the site is stripped of ' topsoil if it is determined that final grading will not begin within 30 days. F F I 5. The developer shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of all Erosion and Sediment Control practices. 6. The topsoil stockpile location shall be immediately protected by silt fence on the downslope side. NOTE: The contractor shall install sediment trapping measures as the first step in construction. Once in place, the contractor shall strip topsoil and begin grading operations. The contractor shall ensure that at the end of each working day all erosion and sediment control measures are in place and functioning properly. This will be strictly enforced. These controls shall be in effect during the remaining development, which includes final grading, utility construction, and paving. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING NOTES: The following construction sequence shall be utilized to ensure that the proper erosion and sediment control practices are in place and fully operational prior to upslope land disturbance. NOTE THAT THE ENTIRE SITE CANNOT BE GRUBBED AT ONE TIME. GRUBBING MUST PROCEED ACCORDING TO THE PHASES BELOW. Sequence"A" 1 — install the Construction Entrance for access to the site. 2—install the riser in the existing pond. 3—install the Temporary Slope Drain from the existing pond to below the area of ST#3. 4—install temporary bridging for vehicle traffic as necessary across TSD. 5—construct Sediment Basin #1 and Sediment Basin ##2. 6—construct Sediment Trap #1 and Sediment Trap #2. 7—install silt fence, diversion dikes, and check dams associated with the above structures. 8—clear and grub the upper portion of the site (i.e. that portion that drains to the Sediment Basins) and the existing Sediment Traps. 9—perform rough grading on the upper portion so that it drains to the existing pond. 10 — construct Sediment Trap #3. 11—install silt fence, diversion dikes, and check dams associated with Sediment Trap #3. 12 — remove Sediment Basin #1. 13—construct Sediment Trap 4. 14 — install Diversion Dikes, Silt Fence, and check dams associated with Sediment Trap #4 15—remove Sediment Basin #2. 16—complete clearing, grubbing, and rough grading. Permanent Stabilization Permanent stabilization shall be applied to denuded areas immediately after final grade is achieved on any portion of the site. Temporary soil stabilization shall be applied within seven days to denuded areas that may not be at final grade but will remain undisturbed for more than 30 days. Permanent stabilization shall be applied to areas left dormant for more than one year. Seeding shall be conducted in accordance with the latest edition of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Permanently seeded areas shall be protected during establishment with straw mulch. Hydro -seeding also requires straw mulch protection. ' Maintenance In general, all erosion and sediment control measures shall be checked daily and after each rainfall. The following items shall be checked in particular: 1. The silt fence, diversion dikes, inlet and outlet protection areas and temporary construction entrances shall be checked for undermining, deterioration, and functioning ability. 2. The sediment traps and sediment basins shall be checked regularly and after each significant rainfall to determine the deposited silt. When sediment reaches the clean out level, it is to be distributed back on the site in such a manner as to prevent further erosion. 3. All seeded areas shall be checked for adequate growth. If adequate growth is not evident, the area shall be re -seeded to prevent the soils from eroding. ' 4. All temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be removed only when authorized by the Frederick County Erosion and Sediment Control Administrator. ' 5. Trapped sediment and the disturbed soil areas resulting from the removal of the temporary measures shall be permanently stabilized to prevent further erosion and sedimentation. 6. Long term maintenance of all stormwater associated items is the sole responsibility of the ' owner or a property owner's association. Stormwater Management Multiple stormwater management basins are utilized on this site to ensure predevelopment flows rates are not exceed in final post development configuration. C R'AD 1 ENGINEERING ! 1 1 1 i 1 Appendix r E&S Design Details i 1 1 1 1 i CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, ! CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS UAD ENGINEERING This section includes details of the sediment basins and sediment traps. Details on the pond are illClUded In Appendix C. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, CONSTRUCTION, LAND PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHI TECTURE CONSUL TANTS TEMP. SEDIMENT TRAP #1 title :Home Depot Distribution Center Area Contributing to Sediment Trap : 35081 sq. ft n.n3534VAo Total Basin Height 4 ft Wet Storage Height 2. 5 ft Length ofBasin Bottom (Long side) 30 ft Width ofBasin Bottom (Short side) 0 Slope of long side ofbasin (8J 2 1 Slope ofshort side ofbasin KS» 2 1 Length oftop ofWet Storage 40 ft Width oftop ofWet Storage 25 ft Length oftop ofDry Storage 46 ft Width of top ofDry Storage 31 ft Outlet Length ,VVETSTORAGE VOLUME Design DRY STORAGE VOLUME ff Design� TOTAL.STORAGE Design� TRIAD Engineering JFQ 4.832094 (lK O.K. (lK nn/nn/ 2 Sedimon/!rap.XLS i ' TEMP. SEDIMENT TRAP #2 TRIAD Engineering title :Home Depot Distribution Center JFG ' Job 8 : CD095 date: 08-30-02 Area Contributing to Sediment Trap : 47068 sq. ft. ' 1..0M;33 Ac. Total Basin Height : 4 ft Wet Storage Height : 2.5 ft Outlet Length 6.483196 ' Length of Basin Bottom (Long side) : ;s5 ft Width of Basin Bottom (Short side) : :5 ft Slope of long side of basin (SJ : 2 :1 ' Slope of short side of basin (Ss) : 2 :1 Length of top of Wet Storage : 45 ft ' Width of top of Wet Storage : 25 ft Length of top of Dry Storage : 51 ft Width of top of Dry Storage : 31 ft WET STORAGE VOLUME . ' Designy........ Required : 1955 ft 3 72.4 yd 3 O.K. ' DRY STORAGE VOLUME Design Y d:>:;< '......... Required : 1955 ft, 72.4 yd 3 O.K. '..::,TOTAL. STORAGE VOLUME Desi n : .... ........................ ' Required : 3909 ft3 144.8 yd 3 O.K. t 1 t09/03/02 Sediment trap.XLS TEMP. SEDIMENT TRAP #3 title :Home Depot Distribution Center TRIAD Engineering JFG Area Contributing 10Sediment Trap 128848 o4.M. 2.95794SAu Total Basin Height 155 ft Wet Storage Height 3. 5 ft Outlet Length 1774708 Length of Basin Bottom (Long side) 611) ft Width ofBasin Bottom (Short side) .8 ft Slope o{long side of basin (SJ 2 1 Slope of short side of basin (8s) 2 1 Length of top ofWet Storage 74 ft Width o/top ofWet Storage 3e ft Length odtop ofDry Storage ou ft Width oftop ufDry Storage 40 ft ' WET STORAGE VOLUME ' Design� ' QRY� STORAGE VOLUME Design� :STORAGE VOLUME. Design� (lK nn/onm2 Sediment trap.XLS ' TEMP. SEDIMENT TRAP #4 TRIAD Engineering ' title :Home Depot Distribution Center job # : CD095 date: 08-30-02 . JFG Area Contributing to Sediment Trap : 56720 sq. ft. ' 1.302112 Ac. Total Basin Height : ; ft Wet Storage Height : .13.5 ft Outlet Length 7.812672 Length of Basin Bottom (Long side) : •0 ft ' Width of Basin Bottom (Short side) : :5 ft Slope of long side of basin (SL) : 2 :1 Slope of short side of basin (Ss) : 2 :1 Length of top of Wet Storage : 44 ft Width of top of Wet Storage : 29 ft ' Length of top of Dry Storage : 54 ft Width of top of Dry Storage : 39 ft 1 WET. STORAGE VOLUME ' 9:.....:...:..............:...... y.:..... Required : 2356 ft' 87.2 yd O.K. DRY STORAGE VOLUME ' Design : 9 Required : s1:8'[i€rft3:> .............. 2356 ft' ................................. :><:<}5.50<:»>.;:d;< ................:.:.... Y....... 87.2 O.K. yd' ' TOTAL STORAGE VOLUME Design .................................. 2 3;<>::;3 € ...................:::::Y:..... . ' Required : 4711 ft' 174.5 yd' O.K. 1 09/03/02 Sediment trap.XLS ' Basin #1 Basin #2 1145323 sq ft 367111 sq ft 26.293 acres 8.427709 acres 47564.03 wet volume 15245.73 wet volume ' 47564.03 dry volume 15245.73 dry volume ' 95128 total volume 30491 total volume 1 Sediment Basin #1 0 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 Storage (cuft) 1 1 1 Sediment Basin #2 10 i 8 - - - -- - - =; ------ - - 6 -- --- -- --- -- - ----------- . -�� 4-- 2- 0-1 0 10600 20600 30000 40000 50000 Storage (cuft) i 1 1 1 1 PL-Fl N1 !Y--� 7A E L-E r � _ 6 w cry m I Site Inspection Form Permit /H"%lder Na/%e SitePIan or ,y�ul�div�lory�P,�an Number Building Perm' t' Njimber / C1 .- -2.-- GENERAL INFORMATION Property Identification Number (PIN) Location Contact Information INSPECTION OF ROADS, DRIVEWAYS & TRAVEL AISLES (Check when completed - note all incomplete work): Street & Traffic Signs ✓ Striping Surface Material Comments Inspector Inspector t Sidewalks & Lighting Dimensions Overall Layout Date Verified Incomplete Date Verified Complete // j o O3 INSPECTION OF PARKING. MANEUVERING AREAS a LOADING AREAS (Check when completed - note all incomplete work): Number of Spaces Striping Surface Material Comments Inspector , Inspector Sidewalks & Lighting ✓ Dimension of Spaces Overall Layout ✓ Date Verified Incomplete Date Verified Complete INSPECTION OF LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS (Check when completed - note all incomplete work): Number of Trees Number of Shrubs Size of Plants Species of Plants Soil Stabilization Seeding Screens Overall Layout Comments Inspector Inspector Date Verified Incomplete Date Verified Complete _ y INSPECTION OF OTHER IMPROVEMENTS (Check when completed - note all incomplete work): Setbacks Proffered Conditions Signs Comments Inspector Inspector Recreational Facilities Preservation Areas Curb & Gutter Date Verified Incomplete Date Verified Complete PIUM RICK COUNTY D"ARYMNT OF PLAMING Ct DRBLOPMNT - F11ML SITZ APPROVAL ez Signatu Date of Appro al Is site approval contingent on a monetary guarantee? Yes* No Bond Number 7 (*If yes, all site improvements noted on this form must be complete prior to the release of a monetary guarantee. In addition, all relevant review agencies shall provide final site approval. A checklist of these agencies is provided below for documentation purposes.) Fire Marshal Virginia Department of Transportation ,Building Inspections Sanitation Authority Public Works City of Winchester Parks & Recreation _ Other ( ) (Please date & initial when all site work is complete & all relevant review agencies have approved) Date Monetary Guarantee Released Initials nrl COUJR of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 September 17, 2003 Mr. Lewis A. Boyer II, President Boyer Landscapes, Inc. P.O. Box 787 Stephens City, VA 22655 RE: Tree Variety Substitutions -Home Depot Site Plan Number: 09-03 Dear- Mr. Boyer: I am in receipt of your letter dated September 16, 2003 (attached) regarding substitution of trees at the Home Depot site. After reviewing the approved site plan for the project and the revised plant list, it appears the proposed substitutions will be acceptable. The changes will be noted in our site plan file for the project. Please call me with any questions you may have. Sincerely, atm(4�I hL Rebecca Ragsdale Planner I Enclosure U VRcbecca\Site PlensUlomeDepot (Trca)\Substilutions.wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 09/16/2003 12:10 BOYER LANDSCAPES 4 6656395 NO.985 P02 oviBoypr landscapes, inc. P.O, Box 707 - Stephens City, VA 22555 (540) 869-7424 Sept 16Lh, 2003 l;ric Lawrence Frederick Couny Zoning Administrator 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Va. 22601 Re: Substitution of Tree Varieties at IIome Depot, Winchester, VA. Dear Eric, Our company will be doing the tree, shrub installation at the above referenced site. Due to availability concerns, as well as survivability issues, I am requesting the following substitutions: 22 Ash (insect borer susceptible) 36 White Oak (Fall dig hazard) 29 Tulip Tree (fall dig hazard) 27 Red Oak (Fall dig hazard) Substihition: Acer saccharum - sugar maple Quercus palustris - pin oak Ph-Ltanus acerifolia - plane tree Cyrus calleryarta - clevelaric select pear Attached are two different lists from Prineton Nursery and Lake County Nursery verifying the hazards of fall digging this material. The trees that I have selected for substitution are from the attached list we have used over the last ten years regarding commercial sites. Size requirements will remain as specified on drawings - In the event my request for substitution is acceptable, please notify Pie in writing so that I may pass the information on to the owner/general contractor..) may be reached at 540- 974-6819(celi) or 540-869-8603(fax), if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lewis A. Boyer 11, President Boyer Landscapes, Inc. 09/16i2003 12:10 BOYER LANDSCAPES 4 6656395 NO.985 D01 .. •w:Y arn4Y flYMIWIY#�11Mjr�� P.O. pox 787 • Stephens tally, VA 22655 (540) 669-7424 FOYER LANBSCAPF.S, INC. FAX 540-869-8603 PLEASE DELW ER THE FOLLOWING PAGES TO; NAME 41(- i Q W M,,, COMPANY F C , DATE `1 • 1 t- • b "3 1 IMF FAX # 1pGS (,39 �3 NO, OF PAGES 5 OFF. # IF YOU HAVE ANY QLTFSHONS CONCERNING THIS FAX CONTACT: A", r-<-O(.Ca C/Cs cu cj ------------------------ NO.985 P03 09/16/2003 12:10 BOYER LANDSCAPES 4 6656395 • WINCHESTER CITY THEE L XST TREES RECOMMENDED POP PLANTING WITHIN THE C11 'Trees 92APhing heights in 4XQ§jg9 nf 40 ft American linden - Tilia ameri,aana• Litbleleaf linden - Tilia eoxdata American sycamore - Platanus occidentalis ---.— London Plane Tree - Platanus x acerifolia 8WOetgum - Liquidambax styraoiflua Green Ash •- Praxinus penneyl.valnica Thornless honey locuat Cleditsin trinnoanthon Our oak - Quarous macrocsairpa Willow oak - Quercus phsllos Red oak - Quercus rubra scarlet Oak - Quercus coccinea =— > Pin oak - Quercus palustrie Catalpa - Catalpa specioea River birch-'eetula nigra Rad maple• -- Acer rubrum ---�--i Bugn.r maple Acer aaccharum Yellowwood - Cladastris kentuke►a Japanese Zelkova - Zelkova serrata Tulip poplar L,iriodendror tulipifera Katsura .free - Cercidophyll.um japoni~oum ME =283 r4UiU9 haiahto of 40 It, Qr 19an ZapunQee pagoda tree - sophorn japonica Goldenrain trey - Koelreuter.ia panioulata American hornbeam - Coryluo ameriaena Crabapple - Malus sp. Amari,ca►n hophornbeam - Carpicus caroliniana Servicabarry - Amelanchier sp. Hawthorne -- Crategue op. Callery Pear 'Aristocrat' otc. roman dogwood - Cornus kousa Dogwood hybrids -'e. Florida x kousa Ruby horsechestnut7 Aesculus x carnes 'Briottiil Hodge Maple Acer camplastre European hornbeam Carpinus betulus Horsaahestnut - Aesculus pavia Sourwood - Oxydendrum arbdxauz h0x7i1� W TREES NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PLANTINO WITSxN THO PROHIBITED FROM hANT'SNa wITHrN VUDLIC RIGHT1 Any apeciea of elm (any member of the genus UIMUU) Silver maple (Ater saccarinum) White Mulberry Tree of Heaven (Ailanthus _) Bradford Pear Trees not allowed for public median of loss than 15 ing due to branching pattern and any Multi -trunk tr Dogwood Cherry crabapples APPROVED; DECEMBER 21, 1993 Korean dogwood by City Tree Commiss, 09/16/2003 12:10 BOYER LANDSCAPES 4 6656395 0 NO.985 PO4 Certain trees have a high risk of failure when dug in the fall. Princeton Nurseries clearly identifies these trees and advises against the risk, However, upon your request, we wIII dig this material, but we assume no responsibility for its survival. In an effort to provide the test means for survival, we will dig fall hazards with an oversized ball. The charge for this procedure will be an additional 5% over the catalog price. This additional charge will also apply to requests for oversize balls dug throughout the year. We wish to intbrnr L'usionlers 011a it is very ri.Nky to dig the lbHowing ireet in the fitft. Acer buergerianum Isfalus • In leaf Betula varieties Nyssa sylvailca Carpinus varieties Ostrya Celtic varieties I1ru1IUS • all stnrtc fruits Cercldlphyllum varieties I'ynn varieties Crataegus varieths t uercus • all Oak) except Q. pilluitris Fagits varieties Salix • weeping varielies Halesia varieties sorbus vadetics Koelreuteria paniculata Tilia tomentosa varieties Li uidamhar varictirs_ Ulmus parvifolla varieties Urlodendron varieties zelkova varieties llyrbrnr�cu G-1 WWr141'J11 09i16i2003 12:10 BOYER LANDSCAPES 4 6656395 NO.905 P05 I t, Plants that Require Special Attention for Fall planting _ Our experfenee At lake County Nursery, Inc. hot shown that certbin aeea require special attention when dug -r , In the fall. With propvrcaretheseplanucan beaucm5fullytrum lantcdInthe fall.Nowaver,itisthepurdwse5 ( ►.- reipamfbilhy to ensure that the proper cultural pracdcei are followed for successful fall trarnplandng, take Count/ Nursery, Inc. t zumes no responslbillty for the survival of the following varledds when dug in the fall j end will Code such orders as'Ou�m �'; t Betula Wigties Kaolieuwritt paniculata Populus virlellei f Carpinus verletles Llr,lo4ndron "Prunus • All stone fruits Cercls canedemis P qut am r styr1cl lua 'Pyres vArlstiei • Cornw varlRtisi Magnglia varletim "Quercus vartll� T ' Cvrylut spp. •Nysso syivatica a N, weep varieties CrataeRui v;rletles dan mbnreum nt Taxodium distichu 'Clnko bllndro oba Fla Acervolla varietlei j »Requires special attention when transplanting both In thv opring and fall. Guldeli;,ea for Fall Plantingi 1, Use A good quality topsoil, 2. Topdress trees with an orprt(C mulch, such a6 leaves or shreddo4 bark, at a depth of 4V for winter i y root protection, 3. ProtsCt all new plantin; from salt splay, either by avoiding planting near nrew where Air home sift is { a problem, er by crecong a protactive sc(een, LCN Staff -Tips —Tree Planting Techniques Soil shrinks away from the ball hole In dry wtnthor, allowin air to enter the plenting hole and dry out the root ba&. NEW MVTHOD for planting trees In tree lawns and f d titl hod " opan arena. We have ovn s met to very effective In preventing the tree root ball from drying out during periods of extreme grid weather Mconditions, YERY IMPORTANTi Incorporate a mulch shelf that fa 6" widv by 4' dthp Into the planting hole to protect the root ball from exposure to drying Of (fee diagram). The mulch shelf protects tha roots from air exposure, pravandngthe root ball from losing excessive moisture. in heavy clay Bolls place the reot ball on a mound of washnd river eggreggnata atone (soo diagram). = K The depth of the stone will depend on the soil density, in hoaviar sells fncorporate mote Kane. During periods of dry weather apply V of watqr to newly planted trees per week. This equals 1 gallon of water per square foot of soil surface, l -dml c S '0 5��6 ■EOOZ '9l 'd� I -A " �, L r 0 1 1, C 0 1- ul � V COUNTY of FRlCDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 January 30, 2003 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Site Plan Approval, Home Depot Distribution Centet•; Site Plan #37-02 Property Identification Number (PIlN) 76-A-53 Dear Mr Ehrenburg: The Frederick County Department of Planning and Development administratively approved the above - referenced plan on January 29, 2003. Currently, there are no adverse comments by any of the required review agencies; however, any fixture comments by these agencies should be addressed promptly. The primary improvements approved with this site plan are listed below: • Construction of a 756,000 square -foot building for use as a distribution center. • Constriction of a portion of Maranto Manor Drive, approximately 700 feet, to provide access to the distribution facility. • 252 paved auto parking spaces, including seven (7) handicap spaces. • Paved trailer loading and parking areas. • Planting of 182 Pine trees to provide screening along the southern portion of the property. • Planting of 137 trees and 16 shrubs to provide parking lot landscaping and landscaping on other portions of the site. • A temporary barrier delineating the woodlands corridor and steep slope protection easement to ensure there is no disturbance of this protected area. It should also be noted that final roadway system design and construction should be completed and approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation prior to an occupancy permit for this facility. Prior to the issuvMcc of a building permit, a proffer shall be paid to Frederick County in the amount of $15,120 for the Stephens City Fire and Rescue Company. 107 North Kent Street a Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 /-< Page 2 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Re: Approval of S.P. 1137-02; Homc Depot Distribution Center January 30, 2003 I am providing you with three copies of the approved site plan. Please forward these to the appropriate representative. Furthermore, please advise the owner that a copy should be kept for future reference and an approved copy must be kept on the construction site throughout the development process. Once site development is complete, the owner should contact this office to schedule an on -site inspection. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Sincerely, r �`rhtC4% Rebecca Ragsdale Planner I RR/rsa Enclosure cc: 'Sean O'Brien, IDI, 3424 Peaclitree Rd., N.E., Suite 1500, Atlanta, GA 30326 & Faxed To 404-479-4001 Jane Anderson, Real Estate Patrick Barker, Economic Development Commission W. Harrington Smitli, Jr., Shawnee Magisterial District Supervisor Jerry Copp, Virginia Department of Transportation em: -William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District Commissioner ✓ Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District Commissioner FILE: U:\Rebecca\Site Plans\l-IomeDepot\Approval.wpd 0 0 PL Ee COPY COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 January 30, 2003 Mr. Allen Hudson Wrights Run, L.P. 2800 Shirlington Road, Suite 803 Arlington, VA 22206 RE: Eastgate Commerce Center - Transportation Requirements Zoning District: M1 (Light Industrial) Dear Mr. Hudson: The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the transportation -related requirements for the Home Depot site and any future development in Eastgate Commerce Center Industrial Park. As you are aware, the final plats for the Home Depot site were approved on January 23, 2003; the site plan for the Home Depot project was approved January 29, 2003. A transportation element of the site plan provides for the construction of a road segment, to be accepted by the State, connecting Route 522 with the Home Depot site. This proposed road segment is named "Maranto Manor Drive" and it follows the same road (Beechwood Drive) illustrated on the approved Master Plan for Eastgate Commerce Center. In an effort to facilitate the subdivision approval establishing the proposed Home Depot lot, a segment of road illustrated on the Eastgate Commerce Center Master Plan between the currently planned terminus of Maranto Manor Drive and the connection to Rainville Road, was not dedicated nor guaranteed. Prior to any future development adjacent to Maranto Manor Drive, it is expected that the land owner will dedicate and provide the necessary guarantees for the remaining segment of roadway illustrated on the approved Master Plan. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Patrick T. Davenport, CZA Zoning and Subdivision Administrator PTD/rsa cc: David F. Springs, L.S., Triad Engineering, P.O. Box 2397, Winchester, VA 22604 John R. Rilcy, Jr., County Administrator Scan O'Brian, IDI Development, 3424 Peachtree Rd., N.E., Suite 1500, Atlanta, GA 30326 & Faxed To: 404479-4001 W. Harrington Smith, Jr., Shawnee District Board Representative Patrick Barker, Economic Development Commission rile: Bond rile, \4DP File, subdivision File, S.P. File, Outgoing Corresp. File U:\Patrick\Conunon\S_D Reviews\L.cagate Conunerce development statusl .wpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 TRIAD ENGINEERING, OC. Post Office Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 667-9300 FAX (540) 667-2260//�� [ TO�d•rC LET70R OF TRANSMITTAL ' DAT JOB NO. -, NTION: c RE: G.�► v d WE ARE SENDING YOU-XAttached _ Under separate cover via The following items: Shop Drawings _ Prints _ Plans _ Samples _ Specificatio Copy of letter _ Change order Other Mo/— CO3 r� ! O/►'I COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: For approval For your use As requested For review and comment _ FOR BIDS DUE I REMARKS Approved as submitted _ Approved as noted Returned for corrections Other Resubmit Copies for approval Submit Copies for distribution Return Corrected prints 20 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO St"Q (/ lh'e�k Signed: m�� aul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. 1-16-03; 4:10PM; 01' 6/03 Faxe& -to NWPaul Ghrenberg RP quest For Site Plan rvomjn!vr0ti Virginia Department of Tryn-Vcsrtationr Mail to: Virginia Department of Transportation Attn: Resident Engineer 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 (540) 984-5600 Hand AeIiver to, Virginia Department of Transportation 2275 Nolil}western Pike Winchester, VA 22603 (540) 535-18-18 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist th-e Vii!A*0j::I Department of Transportation with their review. Please attach Live ,(5) Colaie's cif the situ &'n with traffic generation data and drainage calculations with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial pevelopments Internatioii�il,_Inc_ ,•_ T�_..,_�..___. -- Address: Monarch Tower, Suite- 3424 Peachtree Road, NE _� _ .•-- - Atlanta, GA 30 Attn. • Mr. Sean O'Brien -- Phone Number: (404).479-406U _.._...._ �. __._ .. _._.. . hJame of development and/or description of the request: gat�,_l.P_d atrial Q v+ iaf�.n�c�n't _Site Plan for 1 008 000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution :Cee ronstructt phases Location of property: So-qth_-erly Terminus o Rainville Igo �d Witl�lr! Eastciat In 4i I Park Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia _-.._,� _ _ .__�_.� ,..�_--• Virginia Department of Transportation's Comments: See attached corresp�ndence�mw VDOT: Letter dated 09/24/02 to Triad Engineering, Letter dated 11/05/02 to� Triad Engineering, Fax Transmittal dated 11/2Zj02 _� Dnte received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Date revision received TOTAL P.02 i-i6-03; 4t70PM; TRIAD Engineering ;540 984 5607 9 6/ 6 r 3rill M10. 16 V p \• reour, COMMONWEALTH ®f VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE JERRYA. COPP COMMISSIONER E�i}r1i��P �Q RESIDENT ENGINEER UC L, TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX(540)984-5607 Fax Transmittal TO Mr. Sean O'Brien C/O IDI Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road N.E. Atlanta, GA 30326 Fax #404-479-4001 FROM Ben H. Lineberry, Jr., P.E. (540-984-5605) SUBJECT Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Commerce Center Route 522, Front Royal Pike Frederick County A VDOT response to a meeting held yesterday (11/21/02) to discuss progress status on the subject project: • The standard Frederick County Site Plan Comment Form for agency review was not Included in original site plans submittal to this office. In order to expedite the review process, VDOT released a letter to Triad Engineering on 09/24/02 (copy attached with sketch) to provide for construction entry access to the site via Route 800, Rainville Road. • The first paragraph of the 09/24/02 letter was continued on an addendurn to previous VDOT comments dated 11/05/02 (copy attached), also to Triad Engineering. That letter Included all VDOT comments which were appropriate for site plan stage at the time (including Brad Price, P.E.). We are providing copies of the above letters to Mr. Jeremy Camp of Frederick County in hopes they will be sufficient support of VDOT's concerns at this stage of development. It is satisfactory to proceed with on site construction at this time. However, as indicated In Item 2d. of our 09/24/02 letter, if connection entrance at Route 522 is approved, all construction must be completed prior to opening site use. We trust this will clarify the VDOT position at this stage of development. If there are any questions, please call. xc: Mr. Dave Heironimus Mr. Paul Ehrenberg Mr. Brad Price Mr. Jeremy Camp (faxed) VirginiaDOT.org Total Pages = 5, Including transmittal WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING 1-16-03; 4:10PM; TRIAD Engineering ;540 984 5607 it 4i 6 Philip A. Shucet COMMISSIONER November 5, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE EDINBURG, VA 22824 Ref: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Commerce Center Route 522, Front Royal Pike Frederick County Addendum to Previous VDOT Comments Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRYA-COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The following comments/recommendations have been generated within VDOT review units and are presented for inclusion into your revision of plans for VDOT road improvements associated with the referenced project. • Plan profile sheets should be provided for Route 522 which reflect the current geometric conditions as well as the proposed additions/improvements to compliment the Home Depot roadway access. Among the items which should be addressed is the drainage runoff from Moranto Manor Drive onto the Route 522 intersection. • The existing turn lanes, tapers and crossover at the proposed intersection of Route 522 and Moranto Manor Drive should be reconstructed following VDOT's Road Design Manual; Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways dated September 9, 2002 for the anticipated high volume of truck traffic usage for the road facilities, proposed and existing to be modified. The proposed pavement design should present alternate considerations. o Alternate A) Cement Concrete Structure o Alternate B) Asphalt Concrete Structure for VDOT review and consideration. • VDOT standard CG-13 entrances should be provided at the Route 522 intersection with Moranto Manor Drive and the commercial entrance to the Home Depot site from Moranto Manor Drive. VirginlaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING 1-16-03; 4:10PM; TRIAD Engineering ;540 984 5607 A 5/ 5 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg Ref: Home Depot Distribution Center November 5, 2002 Page Two • The portion of Moranto Manor Drive being proposed with the site plan should be constructed in accordance with VDOT Geometric Design Standard GS-6. • A note should be affixed to the plan which absolves VDOT from all responsibility from maintenance of all stormwater management detention facilities constructed for this site. • Current unaltered VDOT General Notes numbered V1. through V21. (copy attached) should be displayed on the plan cover sheet. • The Traffic Impact Analysis is currently under review in our offices. It may be prudent to delay a revision of the plan for review pending VDOT comments centering on TIA. Whenever all the above comments have been considered by your office, you may submit two copies of revised plan sheets for road and entrance improvements only to this office for VDOT review. If there are any questions, please call. Sincer y ,,,y Barry J. Sweitzer Trans. Roadway Engineer For: Ben H. Lineberry Trans. Ass't. Resident Engineer BJS/rf Attachment xc: Mr. Sam Clem Mr. David Morris Mr. Brad Price Mr. Dave Heirommus 1-16-03; 4:10PM; TRIAD Engineering ;env an•+ oovi •« -•• i • 'mil �l. v t COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 September 24, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering P. 0. Box 2397: Winchester, VA 22604 Ref: Access - Route 800 (Rainville Road), Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is interested in finalizing comments in reference to the location of Home Depot within Eastgate Commerce Center. Additional information is forthcoming which will assist in the finalization of the comments. VDOT will comment on the following: 1. Current Route 800 (Rainville Road) is adequate for a construction entry. 2. VDOT can support the use of Route 800 as a construction entry provided the following is agreed to: a. Prior to opening of Home Depot, an approved roadway system must be installed according to VDOT specifications. b. The roadway system could be either the existing Route 800 or the proposed Route 522 intersection. c. If Route 800 is identified as the main access, an examination will be required to identify the suitability of the roadway for the proposed traffic. Also, any proffers specific to the rezoning of the Eastgate Commerce Center may be activated and completed as required. In addition, it is recognized there may be other items required in reference to traffic impact. d. If the connection to Route 522 is approved, all construction must be completed prior to opening. e. There will not be any agreements to abandonments, discontinuance of maintenance, etc. on Route 800 until a final desirm is agreed upon. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, v, omer F. o an P l Transportation Assistant esident Engineer HFC/rf xc: Mr. Dave Heironimus, Mr. Bill Stover, Mr. Sam Clem, Mr. Eric Lawrence, Mr. Allan Hudson VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING l �j /`i t i AW TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME 01/15/2003 12:18 NAME FRED CO PLANNING DEP FAX 5406656395 TEL 5406655651 SER.0 BROC2J178677 DATE, TI141E 01/15 12: 17 FAX NO. /NNYIE 917038202504 DURATION 00:00:51 PAGE(S) 04 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECPA facsjmil� T RAN SMITTAL__-_- _ Name: Fax: ,Allen Hudson 703 820-2504 From: Date: Subject: Eric Lawrence January 15, 2003 Hone Depot Traffic Impact Statement Pages: 4 C0111.ments: attached are three pages from the traffic impact analysis submitted with the Home Depot site : plan that address Total Build -out traffic. you'll rote that the analysis identifies 2001 Backgrournd traffic on Rt522 at 20,940 vpd, and a site build -out generated count at 4,560 vpd- please contact me with any questions. -Eric facsimile TRANSMITTAL Name: Allen Hudson Tat: 703-820-2504 From: Eric Lawrence Date: January 15, 2003 Subject: Home Depot Traffic Impact Statement Pages: 4 Comments: Attached are three pages from the traffic impact analysis submitted with the Home Depot site plan that address Total Build -out traffic. You'll note that the analysis identifies 2007 Background traffic on Rt522 at 20,940 vpd, and a site build -out generated count at 4,560 vpd. Please contact me with any questions. -Eric Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Planning Director Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 540.665.5651 540.665.6395 fax elawrenc@co.frederick.va.us I r• I :J I :m • i TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for the HOME DEPOT DISTRIBUTION CENTER @ EASTGATE Site Plan Frederick County, Virginia prepared for: Triad Engineering, Inc. Winchester, Virginia October 29, 2002 RECEIVE[ JAN - B 2003 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 11535 Gunner Court - Woodbridge, Virginia 22192 - 703/590-4932 - (FAX) 703/590-1277 - vettra@aol.com 223 (548) r— 3 (1) 490 (374) — r 5 (4) —I �n 'z O C O CD �r 10129102 [OMPANY Rt.277 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) 7 = Traffic Signal 1 U O In M 00 In oo IL A Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 96 (103) — 1 —1 393 (271) n t) �- O r'S - � O �n N � N rz N CDc4 + 0 SITE o Nl r N O n r N N O � L— 37 (154) J I L — 139 (400) r- 159 (314) 68 (116) J Rt.340 r I I 294 (200) — 183(184) —1 �3 o3 i::-- a O In O U N o N 1 N Future "Background" AM/PM Peak Hour - Traffic Volumes No Scale -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- FIGURE 6b 17 223 (548) 490 (374) — 40 (7) —1 O r O 00 N 00In 1 19 (50) L — o (o) I � o c o 10129102 C0M1)ANYI Rt.277 LEGEND 123 (123) = AM (PM) Pk.Hr. "Traffic Volumes 1,200 vpd = Daily Traffic (vehicles per day) = Traffic Signal 1 v In 4- JIL Tasker Rd. (Rt.642) 96 (103) — 1 393 (271) —i N O ~ N r JI Maranto Manor Dr. -� 4,560 vpd sl (114) --1 166 (402) SITE O N c� r CIO-7 � N V N n ^ rn .D 'n O° �^ °' 60 (162) — J I L. — 139 (400) r- 159 (314) 120 (119) J Rt.340 r I 294 (200) — I 183 (184) --1 o iZ- ON C, b ti O N 1In N Future "Total" (w/Site Traffic) AM/PM - Peak Hour Traffic Volumes No Scale -- Yr. 2007 (Buildout) -- FIGURE 10b 30 O1/14/2003 12:18 FAX 404 479 4001 I 1.D.1. NATIONAL, FRE,, DEV. 0 Date: January 14, 2003 To: Rebecca Ragsdale Company: County of Frederick Fax: (540) 665-6395 From: Sean O'Brien Development Manager Company: IDI Phone: (404) 479-4060 Fax: (404) 479-4001 Total pages (including cover): - 3 - Facsimile IDI Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Phone: (404) 479-4000 Fax: (404) 479-4162 Re: Home Depot IDC Message: See attached letter and sketch regarding proposed driveway relocation for the Home Depot project. �AAS 6� Sit oo. Cc: Confidentiality note: The information in this facsimile message is legally privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this telecopy is strictly prohibited. If you have received this telecopy in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message above via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. 0 0 01/14/2003 12:19 PAX 404 479 4001 I.1).1. NATIONAL ITE DEV. is U002 January 14, 2003 Rebecca Ragsdale Planner I County of Frederick Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Driveway Relocation Home Depot IDC — Eastgate Industrial Park Dear Rebecca: Per our telephone conversation on January 9, 2003, we are planning to relocate the IIome Depot entrance drive from its location as shown on the current site plan and subdivision plat. The relocation is necessary to accommodate VDOT's requirement that there is adequate truck clueing distance between 522 and the entrance drive. We have attached a sketch of the proposed relocation that was faxed to Patrick Davenport on January 9, 2003 for your review. As we discussed, we would like to proceed with finalizing the approvals of the site plan and subdivision plat as they were submitted. Once these approvals are granted, we will submit an amendment to the site plan for the County's review and approval. The subdivision plat will be revised to match the site plan via a boundary line adjustment and submitted for the Coutny's review and approval. We have also discussed this issue with VDOT during our November 21, 2003 meeting with them. We are closing on the property on Friday, January 17, 2003 and want to confirm that there are not any issues that the County has with this proposed change. Your response to this request by Thursday, January 16, 2003 would be greatly appreciated. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at (404) 479-4060. Sincerely, Sean O'Brien Development Manager Cc: Al Boschen — Home Depot Jay Wardlaw — Seyfarth Shaw Paul Ehrenberg — Triad Engineering IDI Suite 1500, 3424 Peachtree Road, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30326 (404) 479-4000 Fax: (404) 479-4001 01/14/2003 12:21 FAX 404 479 4001 JAN-L9 2003 14:27 WINC I.D.I. NATIONAL FEE DEN - (a 003 P.02 -------------------------------------- a1i17 �' ••y "�✓ r77 etnil TOTAL P.02 IN COUNTY of FRUDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 MEMORANDUM TO: Bric R. Lawrence, Planning Director FROM: Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I,)ij�- RE: Traffic Impact Analysis Home Depot Distribution Facility-Eastgate Commerce Center DATE: January 13, 2003 I have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by the Vettra Company for Triad Engineering. The analysis was completed in October of 2002 using the ITE 'Trip Generation 11a»ual- 6/h Edition. Analysis is provided in the TIA based on current conditions, based on a traffic growth rate of 6.5 percent, based on the addition of other developments to the roadway system, and then based on the addition of the Home Depot facility. The other developments included in the analysis are the Shenandoah project and developments along Tasker Road west of the Home Depot site. For the analysis, the area roadway system was assumed to be the same as what is existing with no improvements. The existing Level of Service (LOS) for AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the Tasker Road/Route 522 intersection is LOS=B and at the Route 277/340/Route 522 intersection, a LOS=C. With the TIA's projected per annual traffic growth of 6.5 percent and the addition of the two other developments to the roadway system, the projected levels of service for 2007 (buildout) are degraded. At the intersection of Route 522/277/340, the LOS is LOS=F for AM peak hour and LOS=F for PM peak hour. The Route 522/Tasker Road intersection is a LOS=C during AM peak hour and a LOS=F during PM peak hour. Vettra predicts an AM/PM peak hour traffic volume of 20,940 vpd in 2007. Vettra refers to this analysis as the "background traffic." In analyzing the effects of the Home Depot development on the roadway system, Vettra used the trip manual's warehousing trip rates as there was no category for distribution facilities in the manual. Vettra indicates in the study that much fewer trips than the warehousing figure is expected based on real -world information from facilities similar to the proposed Home Depot facility. The only change assumed by Vettra in this portion of the analysis was the completion and connection of Maranto Manor Drive fr•orn Route 522 to Rainville Road. Based on complete build -out of the Home Depot facility in 2007, the 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 2 Eric R. Lawrence, Planning Director Re: Traffic Impact Analysis; Home Depot Distribution Facility at the Eastgate Commerce Center January 13, 2003 facility would add 5,000 vpd to the predicted background 20,940 vpd traffic volume. With the addition of the Home Depot, the LOS for the intersection of Route 522/Route 277/Route 340 and Route 522/Maranto are both at LOS=F for AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. The LOS at the intersection of Tasker/Route 522 for AM peak hour traffic volume is at a LOS=C and at PM peak hour at a LOS =F; the intersection of TaskerRd./Rainville Rd. is at LOS=C and LOS=E. Vettra concludes in this TIA, that comparing the background LOS with the total LOS indicates that the intersection LOS doesn't change significantly with the addition of the Home Depot development. TIA concludes that the proposed development does not significantly impact background traffic. With the implementation of Vettra's recommended mitigation efforts indicated below, it is expected that all LOS will be acceptable (LOS C or better): Year 2003 Rt. 522/Maranto Manor Drive Year 2007 Rt. 522/Maranto Manor Drive Tasker Rd/Rainville Rd RR/rsa UARcbccca\TIAI IomcDcpot.u-pd Recommended Mitigation New signal with turn lanes Recommended Mitigation New signal with turn lanes Raised median along Tasker Road P.O. Box 231), Winchester, VA 22604 Phone 540-667-9300 L:tlAi) FAX 540-667-2260 January 10, 2003 Ms. Rebecca Ragsdale Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Industrial Development Triad Project No. CD-095 Dear Ms. Ragsdale: As per your telephone discussion with Mr. Sean O'Brien of IDI on 1/09/03, you have know other comments on our Site Plan Package, therefore we are herewith submitting five (5) sets of the Site Plans for your final approval. As you are aware, we have submitted the Agency Review Comment Forms to you on 1 /08/03. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us at 540-667-9300. Very Truly Yours, TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. JA7VF- Paul H. Ehr nberg, P.E.PLANNINDirector of Engineering Eric]: Cc: Sean O'Brien, IDI S:AWord Perfect\Home Depot.FCDPD 1-10-03 Plans submission to Planning Dept.wpd Triad Engineering, Inc. Morgantown • St. Albans Greensburg Hagerstown Winchester • Harrisonburg • Purcellville West Virginia Pennsylvania Maryland Virginia gzd —C� -Z 0 t�X 7b -41, �7`v�s awl 01/09/2003 11:01 FAX 404 479 4001 I.D.I. NATIONAL. FEE DEN. LJ U001 IDI Date: January 9, 2003 To: Patrick Davenport Company: Frederick County Fax: (540) 665-6395 From: Sean O'Brien Development Manager Company: IDI Phone: (404) 479-4060 Fax: (404) 479-4001 Total pages (including cover): - 2 - Facsimile IDI Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Phone: (404)479-4000 Fax: (404) 479-4162 Message: Per our conversation this morning, I have attached a sketch for your review of the proposed driveway relocation for the Home Depot project. Cc: Confidentiality note: The information in this facsimile message is legally privileged and confidential Information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this telecopy Is strictly prohibited. If you have received this telecopy In error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message above via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. AO 01./09/2003 1.1:02 FAX 404 479 4001 I.1).1. NATIONAL, FEE1, DEV, U002 JAN-0,9-2003 14:27 TEI WINC P.02 �• � rr r•r w.. r♦ �.•�•. �.��r•-..,.«.....ir++r....ra.lr.w4YUN�Y�wr•Na+�^�w•�rH .uun.r...r�. r•4�14aM.. Entrance Rood Detnil " rr ,•+� MAN ,r 1 -•Cut Ue..i(iri Proposed Design __1 k` l Alit'_ nnt3nt h�eaIIgnment 't 1 r1 ,l 1 • t.:.h Flan 1?pOF tt/AGk• [JNE J �/,, TOTAL Pr.02 TRIAD ENGINEERINGSNC. Post Office Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 667-9300 FAX (54%0) 6/67-2260 T O 'C/� �-d v y 107 Ilia,'? LETSER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE/� _O NO.c _09 F ATTENTION: rp o R WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached _ Under separate cover via The following items: —Shop Drawings _ Prints _ Plans _ Samples _ Specificatio �7 Copy of letter _ Change order Other r/'0 /&ice �z4ho/ rf COPIES DATE N0. DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: For approval _ Approved as submitted For your use _ Approved as noted As requested _ Returned for corrections For review and comment _ Other FOR BIDS DUE 20 REMARKS Resubmit Copies for approval _ Submit Copies for distribution Return Corrected prints PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO SrSigned y^ C� 4V �/�1 g - - 4 Paul H. Ehrenberg, P. E. IRW P.O. Box 2397 — Winchester, VA 22604 Phone 540-667-9300 Ll FAX 540-667-2260 January N8,A Ms. Rebecca Ragsdale Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Industrial Development Triad Project No. CD-095 Dear Ms. Ragsdale: As per our telephone discussion earlier today, we are herewith submitting one (1) set of Approved Site Plan Package Review Comment Forms for your file. Please find enclosed one (1) copy of the Review Forms and/or correspondence from the following Agencies. VDOT Frederick Co. Planning & Development Frederick Co. Sanitation Authority Frederick Co. Inspections Dept. Frederick Co. Engineering Dept. Frederick Co. Fire Marshal Frederick Co. Dept of Parks & Recreation Frederick - Winchester Health Dept. Letter from VDOT Dated 12/09/02 Letter to R. Ragsdale Dated 12/09/02 Comment Form Approval Dated 12/02/02 Comment Form Approval Dated 11 /06/02 Comment Form Approval Dated 11 /22/02 Comment Form Approval Dated 12/10/02 Comment Form Approval Dated 09/06/02 Comment Form Approval Dated 09/ 1 1 /02 Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us at 540-667-9300. Enclosed: Cc: Sean O'Brien, IDI S:I,WordPertect`,Home Depot.FCDPD 1-8-03 submission to Planning Dept.wpd Very Truly Yours, TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Director of Engineering RECEIVED JAN - 8 2003 FREDERICK COUN'y PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Triad Engineering, Inc. Morgantown • St. Albans Greensburg Hagerstown West Virginia Pennsylvania Maryland Winchester • Harrisonburg • Purcellville Virginia • 1J Request For Site Plan Comments Department of Planning and Development Mail to. Hand deliver to: Department of Planning and Development 107 N. Kent Street Attn: County Planner Fourth Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5651 (540) 665-5651 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: 404 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastqate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1008,000 SQ. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center to be constructed in two (2) phases Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastoate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County,Virginia Planning and Development's Comments: Planning and Development use only Date received Date revision received Date approved Incomplete Incomplete Date reviewed Date reviewed Signature and Date E I V E -FYI Signature and Date (revision) FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT t0�csz a �r�4, ,tr;, COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Philip A. Shucet COMMISSIONER December 3, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE EDINBURG, VA 22824 Ref: Temporary Construction Entrance Home Depot Distribution Center Route 800, Rainville Road Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 In accordance with your request dated December 2, 2002 you are given permission to install a temporary construction entrance at the referenced location. This letter is to be considered your permit to do so. The following provisions will be required: • Work area protection signage is to be in accordance with the current Work Area Protection Manual while working on the right-of-way. • All work on the right-of-way is to be confined to the temporary entrance location only. • A minimum 6" depth of VDOT #1 (2-3 inch stone) at a minimum width of 12' is to be placed from the edge of pavement and extended a minimum of 70' with a filter fabric underliner. • All materials spilled, dropped, washed or tracked from vehicles onto the roadway or into storm drains must be removed immediately. • Positive drainage is to be maintained within the right-of-way at all times. • A wash rack will be required. • Any disturbed areas of the right-of-way or damages to the pavement structure adjacent to this entrance will be repaired by you to our satisfaction. • This permit is being issued for 180 days. • All work is to be completed in accordance with the enclosed Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Handbook, Specification 3.02. The Department of Transportation will not be held liable for suit should such result from this operation nor is it granting permission to grade on the property of others or disturb underground utility lines. If the above listed items are not followed this permit may be revoked. Should you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Dave A. Heironimus, Hwy. Permits & Subd. Specialist Sr. DAH/rf Attachment VirginiaDOT.org xc: Mr. Joe Wilder, Mr. Bill Stover WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING JAN W 3 2003 FREDERICK COUN i 1' PLANNING & DEVELOPUENT�- 1992 0 0 3.02 M STD & SPEC 3.02 TEMPORARY STONE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE cE Definition A stabilized stone pad with a filter fabric underliner located at points of vehicular ingress and egress on a construction site. Purpose To reduce the amount of mud transported onto paved public roads by motor vehicles or runoff. Wherever traffic will be leaving a construction site and move directly onto a public road or other paved area. • -� �/� 71, -• �yyf.�� .-..•Owl i - ��.. K ,��1- yam•-)♦ ��. .� - - _ i.I��-- _ _ '� 1992 3.02 1 Planning Considerations Minimum Standard # 17 (MS # 17) requires that provisions be made to minimize the transport of sediment by vehicular traffic onto a paved surface. Construction entrances provide an area where a significant amount of mud can be removed from construction vehicle. tires before they enter a public road and, just as important, the soil adjacent to the paved surface can be kept intact..A filter fabric liner is used as a "separator" to minimize the dissipation of aggregate into the underlying soil due to construction traffic loads. If the action of the vehicles traveling over the gravel pad is not sufficient to remove the majority of the mud or there exists an especially sensitive traffic situation on the adjacent paved road, the tires must be washed before the vehicle enters the public road. If washing is necessary, provisions must be made to intercept the wash water and trap the sediment so it can be collected and stabilized. Construction entrances should be used in conjunction with the stabilization of construction roads (see Std. & Spec. 3.03, CONSTRUCTION ROAD STABILIZATION) to reduce the amount of mud picked up by construction vehicles and to do a better job of mud removal. Other innovative techniques for accomplishing the same purpose (such as a bituminous entrance) can be utilized, but only after specific plans and details are submitted to and approved by the appropriate Plan -Approving Authority. Design Criteria A,a regate Size - VDOT #1 Coarse Aggregate (2- to 3-inch stone) should be used. Entrance Dimensions The aggregate layer must be at least 6 inches thick; a minimum three inches of aggregate should be placed in a cut section to give- the entrance added stability and to help secure filter cloth separator. It must extend the full width of the vehicular ingress and egress area and have a minimum 12-foot width. The length of the entrance must be at least 70 feet (see Plate 3.02-1). Washing , If conditions on the site are such that the majority of the mud is not removed by the vehicles traveling over the stone, then the tires of the vehicles must be washed before entering the public road. Wash water must be carried away from the entrance to a approved settling area to remove sediment. All sediment shall be prevented from entering storm drains, ditches, or watercourses. A wash rack may also be used to make washing more convenient and effective (see Plate 3.02-1). Location The entrance should be located to provide for maximum utilization by all construction vehicles. �J KV 0 1992 Construction Specifications 0 3.02 The area of the entrance must be excavated a minimum of 3 inches and must be cleared of all vegetation, roots, and other objectionable material. The filter fabric underliner will then be placed the full width and length of the entrance. i Following the installation of the filter cloth, the stone shall be placed to the specified dimensions. If wash racks are used, they should be installed according to manufacturer's specifications. Any drainage facilities required because of washing should be constructed according to specifications. Conveyance of surface water under entrance, through culverts, shall be provided as required. If such conveyance is impossible, the construction of a "mountable" berm with'5:1 §lopes will be- permitted., The filter cloth utilized shall be a woven or nonwoven fabric consisting only of continuous chain polymeric filaments or yarns of polyester. The fabric shall be inert to commonly encountered chemicals and hydrocarbons, be mildew and rot resistant, and conform to the physical properties noted in Table 3.02-A- Maintenance 'The entrance shall be maintained in a condition which will prevent tracking or flow of'mud onto public rights -of -way. This may require periodic top .dressing with additional stone or the washing and reworking of existing stone as conditions demand and repair and/or cleanout of any structures used to trap sediment. All materials spilled, dropped, washed, or tracked from vehicles onto roadways or into storm drains must be removed immediately. The use of water trucks to remove materials dropped, washed, or tracked onto roadways will not be permitted under any circumstances. 1992 3k r, r STONE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 70' MIN. EXISTING A PAVEHENT FILTER CLOTH 6" MIN. A MOUNTABLE BERM (OPTIONAL) SIDE ELEVATION EXISTING GROUND 70' MIN. 1f WASHRACK l0' MIN. (OPTIONAL) 10' HIN. 12' MIH. EXISTING PAVEMENT VDOT k1 I \ TOSEDIMENT]NENDTAINAGE 10' MIN. COURSE AGGREGATE g TRAPPING DEVICE I • DUST EXTEND FULL WIDTH OF INGRESS AND EGRESS OPERATION PLAN YYLA V ' A A'/VIEW 12' W N. REINFORCED CONCRETE SECTION A -A SECTION B-B Source: Adapted from 1983 Maryland Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control, and Va. DSWC DRAIN SPACE Plate 3.02-1 P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 Phone 540-667-9300 FAX 540-667-2260 Ms. Rebecca Ragsdale Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Industrial Development Triad Project No. CD-075 Dear Ms. Ragsdale: December 9, 2002 The following represents Triad Engineering, Inc. response to your enumerated comments in your correspondence dated November 19, 2002 (attached). We are responding on a point by point basis to correlate with your comments. A notation is now shown on plan sheets C-8A and C-13A referencing sheet C-41 for placement of the fire lane. The Woodlands/Steep Slopes protection easement has not been recorded in a deed book, however it has been approved at the Frederick County Board of Supervisors at their April 22, 2002 meeting. See attached letter dated April 26, 2002. A snow fence is now required as a temporary physical barrier to delineate the Woodlands corridor and Steep Slope protection easement. See sheet C- 5A, C-10A, C-11A, C-12A, & C-13A. 4. The Plat has been revised and will be sent to the appropriate review agencies for approval in the immediate future. Once we have "sign offs" we will submit for recordation. 5. We have written approval to constrict the facility from VDOT. Please refer to the attached letters dated September 24, 2002 & December 3, 2002. 6. Raised Islands are now shown at the ends of the trailer storage bays in the northwestern parking area. 7. Plan sheet C-45 now shows landscape buffers and screening in plan and cross section views. Please note that it is not possible to construct a berm along the 2 to 1 slope. 8. White pine trees at a minimum height of 4-foot and spaced 8-foot on center are now shown on the plans. See sheet C-45. .BAN - 8 2003 t FRECk_ntCl( COU,FriY PLANNING F_ DEVELOP ENT Morgantown • SI Albans VJpst Virninta Triad Engineering, Inc. Greensburg Pennsvlvanta Hagerstown Marvland Winchester - Harrisonburg • Purcellville Virginia • E Other - We have addressed all comments from other review agencies and are submitting for their respective final approvals. Once we receive all Agency review comment sheet approvals we will forward them along with the five copies of final plans to you. Please find enclosed one (1) set of REVISED Site Plans which incorporate all Review Agency comments including the above responses. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us at 540-667-9300. Very Truly Yours, TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Director- of Engineering Enclosed: Cc: Sean O'Brien, IDI S:\WordPerlccl\Flomc Depo1.FCDPD second commenls.wpd 11/1-9/2002 14:55 5406656395 i FREU C;U t-L:-NNINO uc.r November 19, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 FAXED November 19, 2002 TO: 540-667-2260 Re: 2nd Review Comments, Home Depot Distributions Centerl Site Plan #37-02 Property Identification Number (PIN) 76-A-53 Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: I have completed a review of the revised plan and would like you to address a few issues in a revision. Please note the comments 1 have made below. Review Comments ] . Please note on Sheets C-13A and C-8A that pavement details for the fire lanes are on Sheet C-20. 2. Please reference the deed book and page number or instrument number for the woodlands and steep slope protection easement. 3. Please note on the site plan that during construction, a substantial physical barrier, such as a snow fence, should be established on. site to delineate the woodlands corridor and steep slope protection easement and to prevent its disturbance. 4. Prior to site plan approval, please provide a copy of the recorded plat creating the subject parcel. 5. Please note planning and zoning approval for 000upancy permits for the facility will not be issued until all approved roadway system improvements have been j JAN B 2003 MEDERICK coutM FLA W NG & DEVELOPMENT 107 North Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 d-- 11/19/2002 14:55 5406656395 0 FHEU UU FLANNLNU UCr 0 Page 2 Mi-. Paul H. Ebxenberg, P.E., Triad Engineering Re: Home Depot Distribution Center, Site Plan #37-02 November 19, 2002 6. Please note that the zoning ordinance requires raised islands at the ends of all parking bays. Raised landscaped islands with curb and. gutter should be added to the ends of the trailer staging/storage parking bays on the northern portion of the site. 7. On the landsoape plan, Sheet C-45, please indicate what types of buffers and screens are required. Please provide cross sections or profiles for required buffers and screens. 8. A single row of evergreen trees, planted eight feet apart, should be provided on the southern portion of the site to ensure adequate screening of trailer loading/dock parking. After you have revised the site plan, please resubmit one copy so that I may verify the information contained on the plan. I will then need all approved review agency co..mment sheets and .five copies of the final site plan for approval. Comment sheets are required from the following agencies: Building I»spections Department; Frederick County Engineer (Public Works); Frederick County Fiore Marshal; Virginia Department ofTransportatio.n (VDOT); Frederick County Sanitation Authority; and the Winchester Regional Airport. If you have any questions concerning this review, please do not hesitate to contact ire. Sincerely, Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I RAR/b ah cc: Industrial Developments International, Inc. Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road, NE Atlanta, GA 30326 em: Patrick Barker, Economic Development Commission Director f bl0.rly rtA1$ilr. Phn��Nr+�rfh�[�IC t�MdIlov�c�.»7c� 10 02 10:08a April 26, 2002 g.w. clifford & assoc ID Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Attn: Charles Maddox 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 540-665-u450 P -e COF COUNTY of FREDERICK Depariinvait of Planning and Develop bent S40/ 66S-5SS 1 FAX: 540/ 66S-639S RE: STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE WAIVER AT EASTGATE COMMERCE CENTER Dear Chuck: This letter is to confirm that your request for a waiver of the steep slope disturbance requirement of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance was approved by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on April 22, 2002. The subject area is located in the southern portion of the Eastgate Commerce Center in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The steep slope waiver would apply to the 235.75-acre master planned project, zoned B2 (Business General), B3 (Industrial Transition), and M1 (Light Industrial). 1) A survey description for the "preservation area" is required to ensure that subsequent site development plans do not encroach into this area. If youAve any questions regarding the approval of this waiver, please feel free to call this office. Sincejely, Eric 1Z-Lawrencc, AICP Deputy Director ERL/ch cc: W. Harrington Smith, Jr., Shawnee District Supervisor Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner Jane Anderson, Real Estate JAN -., 8 2003 F-REDERICK COUNT'/ PUV,JNING & DEVL-LOPMEN T V[F-FaEMP`Fzs P" C unmc.cc C u.wpi 107 i\,,gri}) >cnt Street - Wir,chesir.r, Vir"inin 22601 _jI 06 02 04:57p c1iord R assoc 540-665-0493 0 P -c s�l ---'0-2022 03:3OPi FROM t-l'gRSH&1 G6E Lff{D 9-Rv. yOR TO II1 ��I 666�88' b8y�, k' L et <1 ti r 7223520 P.62 AM rs-�� e 817MID srl AkOVEY I: 19 I r: sir I s JO 277LE �EPORT FURNISHES / ASEWEJV 07HER THAN .5I IOWN MAY cvsS .' - h I PLAT SHOW G TREE & STR AM PROTECTION EA EMENT 'j OIV THE LANDPF WRIGHT'S RUN L.P. j; DEED BOOK 7-19 PAGE 642 'j OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT � NA i MONTIE W_ QHSON & PEARL E. GIBSON 400 0 400 800 SCALE. 1 " = 400' TH OF r a Do ]as C. Legge "fib. 001197 COMMONWEALTH of VIR QINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE Philip A. Shucet EDINBURG, VA 22824 COMMISSIONER September 24, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg UO Triad Engineering P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 Ref: Access - Route 800 (Rainville Road), Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is interested in finalizing comments in reference to the location of Home Depot within Eastgate Commerce Center. Additional information is forthcoming which will assist in the finalization of the comments. VDOT will comment on the following: 1. Current Route 800 (Rainville Road) is adequate for a construction entry. 2. VDOT can support the use of Route 800 as a construction entry provided the. following is agreed to: a. Prior to opening of Home Depot, an approved roadway system must be installed according to VDOT specifications. b. The roadway system could be either the existing Route 800 or the proposed Route 522 intersection. c. If Route 800 is identified as the main access, an examination will be required to identify the suitability of the roadway for the proposed traffic. Also, any proffers specific to the rezoning of the Eastgate Commerce Center may be activated and completed as required. In addition, it is recognized there may be other items required in reference to traffic impact. d. If the connection to Route 522 .is approved, all construction r List be completed prior to opening. e. There will not be any agreements to abandonments, discontinuance of maintenance, etc. on Route 800 until a final design is agreed upon. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, 10 mer F. o an Transportation Assistant esident Engineer HFC/rf xc: Mr. Dave HC1rOnlmUS, Mr. Bill Stover, Mr. Sam Clem, Mr. Eric Lawrence; Mr I JAN B 2003 Allan Hudson FREUERICK COUNTY PLANNING & LEVELOPMENT VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEPVIRGINIA MOVING COMMONWEALTH LTH ®f VIRC-j]INIA Philip A. Shucet COMMISSIONER December 3, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE EDINBURG, VA 22824 Ref: Temporary Construction Entrance Home Depot Distribution Center Route 800, Rainville Road Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRYA. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 9B4-5607 In accordance with your request dated December 2, 2002 you are given permission to install a temporary construction entrance at the referenced location. This letter is to be considered your permit to do so. The following provisions will be required: • Work area protection signage is to be in accordance with the current Work Area Protection Manual while working on the right -of --way. • All work on the right-of-way is to be confined to the temporary entrance location only. • A minimum 6" depth of VDOT I/1 (2-3 inch stone) at a minimum width of 12' is to be placed from the edge of pavement and extended a minimum of 70' with a filter fabric underliner. • All materials spilled, dropped, washed or tracked from vehicles onto the roadway or into storm drains must be removed immediately. • Positive drainage is to be maintained within the right-of-way at all times. • A wash rack will be required. • Any disturbed areas of the right-of-way or damages to the pavement structure adjacent to this entrance will be repaired by you to our satisfaction. • This permit is being issued for 180 days. • All work is to be completed in accordance with the enclosed Virginia Erosion & Sediment Co itrol Handbook, Specification 3.02. The Department of Transportation will not be held liable for suit should such result from this operation nor is it granting pemussion to grade on the property of others or disturb underground utility lines. If the above listed items are not followed this permit may be revoked. Should you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, q)6-VL Dave A. Heironimus, Hwy. Permits & Subd. Specialist Sr, ,JAN -_ Q 2003 DAi-1/rf Attachment VirginiaDOT.org xc: Mr. Joe Wilder, Mr. Bill Stover WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING FREDERICK COUNTY PI „rJ?IIP!G L', G?VELOPMENT i 0 3.02 1992 STD & SPEC 3.02 TEMPORARY STONE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE Definition A stabilized stone pad with a filter fabric underliner located at points of vehicular ingress and egress on a construction site. • .. To reduce the amount of mud transported onto paved public roads by motor vehicles or runoff. Wherever traffic will be leaving a construction site and move directly onto a public road or other paved area. - • - .r •_ •-, ,�� _ �w7�.'.r'r•.4, �y�A�:ram. •rev. • 1 3 1992 .02 Planning Considerations ` Minimum Standard # 17 (MS # 17) requires that provisions be made to minimize the transport of sediment by vehicular traffic onto a paved surface. Construction entrances provide an area where a significant amount of mud can be removed from construction . vehicle.tires before they enter a public road and, just as important, the soil adjacent to the paved surface can be kept intact... filter fabric liner is used as.a "separator" to minimize the dissipation of aggregate into the underlying soil due to construction traffic loads. If the action of the vehicles traveling over the gravel pad is not sufficient to remove the majority of the mud or there exists an especially sensitive traffic situation on the adjacent paved road, the tires must be washed before the vehicle enters the public road. If washing is necessary, provisions must be made to intercept the wash water and trap the sediment so it can be collected and stabilized. Construction entrances should be used in conjunction with the stabilization of construction roads (see Std. & Spec. 3.03, CONSTRUCTION ROAD STAB ILIZATIOII) to reduce the amount of mud picked up by construction vehicles and to do a better job of mud removal. Other innovative techniques for accomplishing the same purpose (such as a bituminous entrance) can be utilized, but only after specific plans and details are submitted to and approved by the appropriate Plan -Approving Authority. Design Criteria Aagregate Size VDOT #1 Coarse Aggregate (2- to 3-inch stone) should be used. Entrance Dimensions The aggregate layer must be at least 6 inches thick; a minimum three inches of au- elate should be placed in a cut section to give- the entrance added stability and to help secure filter cloth separator. It must extend the full width of the vehicular ingress and egress area and have a minimum 12-foot width. The length of the entrance must be at least 70 feet (see Plate 3.02-1). Washing If conditions on the site are such that the majority of the mud is not removed by the vehicles traveling over the stone, then the tires of the vehicles must be washed before entering the public road. Wash water must be carried away from the entrance to a approved settling area to remove sediment. All sediment shall be prevented from entering storm drains, ditches, or watercourses. A wash rack may also be used to make washing more convenient and effective (see Plate 3.02-1).E-5 Location The entrance should be located to provide for maximum utilization by all construction vehicles. • 1992 Construction Specifications 3.02 must be eared of The area of the entrance must be excavated a minimum of 3 material. The filter hes fabricdu derlinerlwill then all vegetation, roots, and other objectionable be placed the full width and length of the entrance. Following the installation of the filter cloth, the stone shall be placed to the specified - dimensions. If wash racks are used, they should be installed according to manufacturer's specifications. Any drainage facilities required because of washing should be constructed according to specifications. Conveyance nvIf such conveyance f surface ater under s impossibler the ,cohns�ructionugh l`ofta shall be provided as required. "mountable" berm with 5:1 slopes will be- permitted.. The filter cloth utilized shall be a woven or nonwoven fabric consisting only of continuous chain polymeric filaments or yarns 'of polyesmildewrot resistant, and conform o The and fabric cshall be inert to � he nly encountered chemicals and hydrocarbons, b physical properties noted in Table 3.02-A_ Maintenance The entrance shall be maintained in a condition which will prevent tracking or flow of* mud onto public rights -of -way. This may require periodic top .dressing with additional stone or the washing and reworking of existing stone as conditions demand and repair and/or cleanout of any structures used to trap sediment. All materials spilled, dropped, washed, or tracked from vehicles onto roadways or into storm drains must be removed immediately. The use of water trucks to remove materials dropped, washed, or tracked onto roadways will not be permitted under any circumstances. I �. 1992 II r STONE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 70' MIN. EXISTING A PAVEHENT .3' .r S: I FILTER CLOTH 6 SIN A HOUNTABLE BERH (OPTIONAL) SIDE ELEVATION EXISTING GROUND 12' HIN. 70' MIN. .D WASHRACK I. f— (OPTIONAL) Z- VDOT kl I I POSITIVE DRAINAGE COURSE AGGREGATE B TO SEDIMENT I TRAPPING DEVICE • MUSTEXTEND FULL WIDTH PLAN N \'I�IA/ OF INN GRESS AND EGRESS VIEW OPERATION LH ""` SECTION A -A 6'-r REINFORCED CONCRETE SECTION B-B Source; Adapted from 1983 Mar -viand Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control, and Va. DSWC DRAIN SPACE Plate 3.02-1 3.02 • Mail to: Department of Planning Attn: County Planner 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5651 Request For Site Plan Comments Department of Planning and Development and Development Hand deliver to: 107 N. Kent Street Fourth Floor Winchester, VA (540) 665-5651 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: 404 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: East ate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008, 000 S Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two 2phases Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastaate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Planning and Development's Comments: Date received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) planning and Development use only Date revision received Incomplete Date reviewed Date approved - r',i Eu D .JAN '- 8 2003 I FREDERICK COUNRY PLANNING (< DEVELORMENT i 4k. • • • • 1 Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County Sanitation Authority Mail to: Hand deliver to: Frederick County Sanitation Authority 315 Tasker Road Attn: Engineer Director Stephens City, VA P.O. Box 1877 (540) 868-1061 Winchester, VA 22604 (540) 868-1061 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta Ga 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: 404 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two 2 phases. Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Frederick County Sanitation Authority's Comments: 3/1,,, �Y/x!F v�d .9 S /wzz7 Q -- G I7E S Sanitation Authority use only Date received Date revision received Date approved Incomplete Incomplete Date reviewed Date reviewed Signature and Date Q� Signature and Date (revision) -- -- 4 �'1,F, �-D� ,y'/,4/7S ...is (. ;, ��_ �� N / S,E IVYZ4 A of S/7,�.�TS si9, GA M, /% /� �i/, `r`� ►A N -- 8 2003 �y y cl,4410 3 „, 1:1-VELOPMEN] Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County Infections Department Mail to: Hand deliver to: Frederick County Inspections Department 107 N. Kent Street Attn: Building Official Fourth Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5650 (540) 665-5650 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach one (1) copy of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: East_gate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases Location of property: Southern Terminus of Rainville Road. Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia -- Inspections Department Comments: Date received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Date revision received Incomplete Date reviev 'G i o" C- y A d i cl-m i of 6,1- L3yr� Use only Date approved *- is �.'d 0, - D o a 2003 iIC!<COM" > lr;• ?l�r;�� '. LEVELOPiMENT • • Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County Engineering Department Mail to: Frederick County Engineering Attn: Director of Engineering 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5643 Hand deliver to: Dept. 107 N. Kent Street Fourth Floor Winchester, VA (540) 665-5643 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Address: Monarch Tower Suite1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases r7—;.,r.r..-„— r)—nrfmonf'c (`nmmanfc- Date received lD 31/0�2 Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Engineering Department use only Date revision received Incomplete Dve reviewed Date approved ("2�OZ 8 200 4. 0 • Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County Fire Marshal Mail to: Frederick County Fire Marshal Attn: Director of Engineering 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-6350 Hand deliver to: 107 N. Kent Street First Floor Winchester, VA (540) 665-6350 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: 404 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: East ate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 S . Ft.Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two 2phases. Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Fire Marshal's Comments: Fire and Rescue Dent use only Date received \\� _ �y_ Oa Date revision received Date approved Incomplete Incomplete Date reviewed =-O Date r vie ec� - - -, • q ; p > > Signature and Date �� "� �_�_\�-�i 0 ' Oa Signature and Date (revision) \ �\ F l� PLANNNWG & DEV LOPMIENT u • Fre erick Cour4yFe;.and Rescue. Department A Office of the Fire;,Marsha Plan Review acid Comments -� s. {. Control number Date received Date reviewed Date Revised SP02-0059RR 12/10/2002 12/10/2002 12/5/2002 Project Name Applicant Home Depot Distribution Center Industrial Developments International Address City State Zip Applicant Phone Monarch Tower, 3424 Peachtree Rd. Atlanta Ga. 30326 404-479-4060 Type Application Tax ID Number Fire District Rescue District Site Plan 76-A-53 11 11 Current Zoning Election District M-1 Recommendations Shawnee Automatic Sprinkler System Automatic Fire Alarm System Residential Sprinkler System Yes Yes No Other recommendation Requirements Emergency Vehicle Access Hydrant Location Fire Lane Required Adequate Adequate Yes Siamese Location Roadway/Alsleway Width Special Hazards Adequate Adequate No Emergency Vehicle Access Comments Access Comments Additional Comments Plan Approval Recommended Reviewed By Yes Timothy L. Welsh JAN 8 2003 FRECERICK COUtfl PIj\NNINIG F. DEVELOPIMENT SignatureTitle x\ �s�, . 10/17/2002 10:54 FAX 404 479 4001 I.D.I. NATIONAL FUE DEV. • WJUUL/UUL Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County Department of Parks and Recreation Mail to: Hand deliver to: Frederick County Dept. of Parks & Recreation 107 N. Kent Street RECEIVED Attn: Director of Parks & Recreation Second Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA APT 1 4 2002 Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5678 (540) 665-5678 IDI CORP. Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency their review. Please attach one (1) copy of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases. Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia Parks and Recreation Dept's. comments: Plan appears to meet open space requirements Parks and Date received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date _ Signature and Date (revisi Recreation - Dept- Date revision received Incomplete Date reviewed r� use only Date approved JAN 8 2003 Ii 1'7:11c:"<c�,u,;� -. L4 -�3U`1 _b6 Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County -Winchester Health Department Mail to: Frederick -Winchester Health Department Attn: Sanitation Engineer 107 North Kent Street, Suite 201 Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 722-3480 Hand deliver to: 107 N. Kent Street, Suite 201 Winchester, VA (540) 722-3480 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach one (1) copy of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: 404 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sg. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases. Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County,Virginia Health Dept's Comments: Date received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Health Dent use onl Date revision received Incomplete Date reviewed,,_ Date approved JAW-7-8 2003 r-nEo nici<cnu;•i. PLANNINA cc'd�t_GiF6_ - 2 • P.O. Box 2397 _ Winchester, VA 22604 Phone 540-667-9300 FAX 540-667-2260 December 9, 2002 Ms. Rebecca Ragsdale Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Industrial Development Triad Project No. CD-075 Dear Ms. Ragsdale: The following represents Triad Engineering, 111C. I'CSi)OI1SC to yolil' elllllIICl'atCCI COIIl11ICI1tS III your correspondence dated November 19, 2002 (attached). We are responding on a point by point basis to correlate With your comments. I. A notation is now shown on plan sheets C-8A and C-13A referencing sheet C-41 for placement of the fire lane. .� The Woodlands/Steep Slopes protection easement has not been recorded in a deed book, "\ �q however it has been approved at the Frederick County Board Of Supervisors at their April 22, 2002 meeting. See attached letter dated April 26, 2002. 3. A snow fence is now regUii'Cd as a temporary physical barrier to delineate the Woodlands corridor and Steel) Slope protcctioil easement. See sheet C- 5A, C-10A, C-I IA, C-I 2A., & C-13A. 4. The Plat has been revised and will be sent to the appropriate review agencies for approval A^ III the immediate fntUl'C. Once we have "sign offs" We will submit for recordation. C 5. We have written approval to construct the facility from VDOT. Please refer to the U�t attached letters dated September 24, 2002 & December 3, 2002. 6. Raised Islands are now shown at the ends of the trailer storage bays in the northwestern parking area. 7. Plan sheet C-45 now shows landscape buffers and screening in plan and cross section views. Please note that it is not possible to construct a berm along the 2 to I slope. S. White pine trees at a minipill height of 446ot and Spaced S-foot on center are now shown on the plans. See sheet C-45. R CEIVED DEC 1 0 2002 Triad Engineering, Inc. Morgantown • St. Albans Greensburg Hagerstown West Virginia Pennsylvania Maryland FREDERICI<COUt,[ y PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Winchester • Harrisonburg • Purcellville Virginia • • Other - We have addressed all comments from other review agencies and are submitting for their respective final approvals. Once we receive all Agency review comment sheet approvals we will forward them along with the five copies of final plans to you. Please find enclosed one (1) set of REVISED Site Plans which incorporate all Review Agency comments including the above responses. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us at 540-667-9300. Very Truly Yours, TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Director of Engineering Enclosed: Cc: Sean O'Brien, IDI S... WonlPerfect',Home Depot.FCDPD second comments.-pd 11/3,9/2002 14: 55 5406656395 0 FRED CO PLANNING �EP PAGE 01/02 November 19, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-0395 FAXED November 19, 2002 TO: 540-667-2260 Re: 2"a Review Comments, Home Depot Distribution Center; Site Plan #37-02 Property Identification Number (PIN) 76-A-53 Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: I have completed a review of the revised plan and would like you to address a few issues in a revision. Please note the comments I have made below. Review Comments Please note on Sheets C-13A and C-8A that pavement details for the fire lanes are on Sheet C-20. 2. Please reference the deed book and page number or instrument number for the woodlands and steep slope protection casement. 3. Please note on the site plan that during construction, a substantial physical barrier, such as a snow fence, should be established on site to delineate the woodlands corridor and steep slope protection easement and to prevent its disturbance. 4. Prior to site plan approval, please provide a copy of the recorded plat creating the subject parcel. 5. Please note planning and zoning approval for ocoupancy permits for the facility will not be issued until all approved roadway system improvements have been completed. 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 11/1.9/2002 14:55 5406656395 FRED CO PLANNINGEP PAGE 02/02 Page 2 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E., Triad Engineering Re: Home Depot Distribution Center, Site Plan #37-02 November 19, 2002 6. Please note that the zoning ordinance requixes raised islands at the ends of all parking bays. Raised landscaped islands with curb and gutter should be added to the ends of the trailer staging/storage parking bays on the northern portion, of the site. 7. On the landsoape plan, Sheet C-45, please indicate what types of buffers and screens are required. Please provide cross sections or profiles for required buffers and screens. 8. A single row of evergreen trees, planted eight feet apart, should be provided on the southern portion of the site to ensure adequate screening of trailer loading/dock parking. After you have revised the site plan, please resubmit one copy so that I may verify the information contained on the plan. I will then need all approved review agency comment sheets and five copies of the final site plan for approval. Comment sheets are required from the following agencies: Building Inspections Department; Frederick County Engineer (Public Works); Frederick County Fire Marshal; Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT); Frederick County Sanitation Authority; and the Winchester Regional Airport. If you have any questions concerning this review, please do not hesitate to contact rne. Sincerely, Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I RAR/bah cc: Industrial Developments international, Inc. Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road, NE Atlanta, GA 30326 ern: Patrick Barker, Economic Development Commission Director [1 %Lrlvrce\$ilr Tlnn.%Ift+ eT>CrcNl4rondTtcr;c.,.wl*ti �' Ju ], 10 .02 1 O: 0 8 a g.w. clifford & assoc. • 540 I&5-0493 p.2 57 _ April 26, 2002 Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Attn: Charles Maddox 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Deparlment of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 RE: STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE WAVER AT EASTGA.TE COMMERCE CENTER Dear Chuck: This letter is to confirm that your request for a waiver of the steep slope disturbance requirement of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance was approved by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on April 22, 2002. The subject area is located in the southern portion of the Eastgate Commerce Center in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The steep slope waiver would apply to the 235.75-acre master planned project, zoned B2 (Business General), B3 (Industrial Transition), and M1 (Light Industrial). 1) A survey description for the "preservation area" is required to ensure that subsequent site development plans do not encroach into this area. If you ave any questions regarding the approval of this waiver, please feel free to call this office. Since'ely, Eric R. Lawrence, AJCP Deputy Director ERL/ch cc: W. Harrington Smith, Jr., Shawnee District Supervisor Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner Jane Anderson, Real Estate n VAS—da%\Apr--d 11n\\VAI VU-R_E-XUSPE-M"11 C---. Ct,.,-N 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 � Ju'l 00 02 04: 57P w. c-.is1 if Ford & assoc e6-2F3-2002 03:30Pl FROM t"RSH&LEGGE LRVo qjA)EyOR TO UNE L-2 IL4 L5 L6 00 10 01 66�g.L12 W L14 L15 L16 LI 7 Lie L19 s L20 S s N a30 COl / 19 Ip I% Y Ip. I. NO 277LE PART f UPOWSHE, r07HER NAN -910;W A4fA y ZWS} 540165 -0493 t Ti,d qo�� O-Q-� 72 —Ii52Ci P-02 S 10-520-2x---� N 49-TI72—ow-W' GiTWO—jV S 45-0-1'4—ZV—W s 53:5�2'I 2 S 34w 31 w S 42-2701" w- 11 N 7422'3415 -E *4 TO-7—i t16 A12090 AMEY Ul—�AN 294.; 149-1 207,1 204.8 214.0 85.5, 251 76.90 97.9 149.33 2" M 9 97 .9 49. .3 1 127�9 88.75 117.9.3 614.74 i4—,0719 162Z14 1 598.63 21.513 < 11011 N E W. QRSON & PEARL E C113SON 400 0 400 800 SCALE: 1 4nn' PLAT SHOWIN G TREE & STR AM PROTECTION EA EMENT j; 019 THE LAND PF q WRIGHT'S RUN L.P. DEED BOOK Zjq PAGE 642 :1 OPEQLJON MAGISI-ER14;L DISTRICT v k I-- �- �Wy,TH Op Do lag C. Legge W. 001197 p - 2 • • xc: ,3 jti, c tHaw�.. •i;r •1 �4 - r rrl r�i tl�Jl c t� COMMONWEALTH of VIRCjINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 September 24, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering P. 0. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 Ref: Access - Route 800 (Rainville Road), Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is interested in finalizing comments in reference to the location of Home Depot within Eastgate Commerce Center. Additional information is forthcoming which will assist in the finalization of the comments. VDOT will comment on the following: 1. Current Route 800 (Rainville Road) is adequate for a construction entry. 2. VDOT can support the use of Route 800 as a construction entry provided the following is agreed to: a. Prior to opening of Home Depot, an approved roadway system must be installed according to VDOT specifications. b. The roadway system could be either the existing Route 800 or the proposed Route 522 intersection. c. If Route 800 is identified as the main access, an examination will be required to identify the suitability of the roadway for the proposed traffic. Also, any proffers specific to the rezoning of the Eastgate Commerce Center may be activated and completed as required. In addition, it is recognized there may be other items required in reference to traffic impact. d. If the connection to Route 522 is approved, all construction mist be completed prior to opening. e. There will not be any agreements to abandonments, discontinuance of maintenance, etc. on Route 800 until a final design is agreed upon. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, lOmer F. Hof an Transportation Assistant esident Engineer HFC/rf Mr. Dave Heirommus, Mr. Bill Stover, Mr. Sam Clem, Mr. Eric Lawrence, Mr. Allan Hudson VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING 0 0 � s T3A'fnJ',_ COMMONWEALTH of VIRCjINIA Philip A. Shucet COMMISSIONER December 3, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE EDINBURG, VA 22824 Ref: Temporary Construction Entrance Home Depot Distribution Center Route 800, Rainville Road Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRYA. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 In accordance with your request dated December 2, 2002 you are given permission to install a temporary constriction entrance at the referenced location. This letter is to be considered your permit to do so. The following provisions will be required: • Work area protection signage is to be in accordance with the current Work Area Protection Manual while working on the right-of-way. • All work on the right-of-way is to be confined to the temporary entrance location only. • A minimum 6" depth of VDOT #1 (2-3 inch stone) at a minimum width of 12' is to be placed from the edge of pavement and extended a minimum of 70' with a filter fabric underliner. • All materials spilled, dropped, washed or tracked from vehicles onto the roadway or into storm drains must be removed immediately. • Positive drainage is to be maintained within the right-of-way at all times. • A wash rack will be required. • Any disturbed areas of the right-of-way or damages to the pavement structure adjacent to this entrance will be repaired by you to our satisfaction. • This permit is being issued for 180 days. • All work is to be completed in accordance with the enclosed Virginia Erosion & Sediment Control Handbook, Specification 3.02. The Department of Transportation will not be held liable for suit should such result from this operation nor is it granting permission to grade on the property of others or disturb underground utility lines. If the above listed items are not followed this permit may be revoked. Should you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, ur L 1 0 2002 Dave A. Heironimus, Hwy. Per -nuts & Subd. Specialist Sr. i IkeOERICKCGUNIV DAH/rf FUNNING & OErtLOPMEigT Attachment VirginiaDOT.org xc: Mr. Joe Wilder, Mr. Bill Stover WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING 0 • 1992 3.02 STD & SPEC 3.02 TEMPORARY STONE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE cE Definition A stabilized stone pad with a filter fabric underliner located at points of vehicular ingress and egress on a construction site. Purpose To reduce the amount of mud transported onto paved public roads by motor vehicles or runoff. Wherever traffic will be leaving a construction site and move directly onto a public road or other paved area. - - - - - - ...7.►c. •sir-J a•rt' i:v. ..s+r^y� '�'�r �� _ re��i' VEJ }��+-y'. %•'f'(��i � _ l,.•.;r:?Y 4r'� _ .��_.riiz�s �� i � -- � �� , .-'�. - �� sue--• � = � . �. - � - III-6 1992 • � 3.02 Planning Considerations Minimum Standard # 17 (MS # 17) requires that provisions be made to minimize the transport of sediment by vehicular traffic onto a paved surface. Construction entrances provide an area where a significant amount of mud can be removed from construction vehicle. tires before they enter a public road and, just as important, the soil adjacent to the paved surface can be kept intact. -A filter fabric liner is used as a "separator" to minimize the dissipation of aggregate into the underlying soil due to construction traffic loads. If the action of the vehicles traveling over the gravel pad is not sufficient to remove the majority of the mud or there exists an especially sensitive traffic situation on the adjacent paved road, the tires must be washed before the vehicle enters the public road. If washing is necessary, provisions must be made to intercept the wash water and trap the sediment so it can be collected and stabilized. Construction entrances should be used in conjunction with the stabilization of construction roads (see Std. & Spec. 3.03, CONSTRUCTION ROAD STABILIZATION) to reduce the amount of mud picked up by construction vehicles and to do a better job of mud removal. Other innovative techniques for accomplishing the same purpose (such as a bituminous entrance) can be utilized, but only after specific plans and details are submitted to and approved by the appropriate Plan -Approving Authority. Design Criteria Ago-Tegate Size VDOT #1 Coarse Aggregate (2- to 3-inch stone) should be used. Entrance Dimensions The aggregate layer must be at least 6 inches thick; a minimum three inches of aggregate should be placed in a cut section to give- the entrance added stability and to help secure filter cloth separator. It must extend the full width of the vehicular ingress and egress area and have a minimum 12-foot width. The length of the entrance must be at least 70 feet (see Plate 3.02-1). Washing , If conditions on the site are such that the majority of the mud is not removed by the vehicles traveling over the stone; then the tires of the vehicles must be washed before entering the public road. Wash water must be carried away from the entrance to a approved settling area to remove sediment. All sediment shall be prevented from entering storm drains, ditches, or watercourses. A wash rack may also be used to make washing more convenient and effective (see Plate 3.02-1). Location The entrance should be located to provide for maximum utilization by all construction vehicles. III - 7 a I i 1992 3.02 Construction Specifications The area of the entrance must be excavated a minimum of 3 inches and must be cleared of all vegetation, roots, and other objectionable material. The filter fabric underliner will then be placed the full width and length of the entrance. Following the installation of the filter cloth, the stone shall be placed to the specified dimensions. If wash racks are used, they should be installed according to manufacturer's specifications. Any drainage facilities required because of washing should be constructed according to specifications. Conveyance of surface water under entrance, through culverts, shall be provided as required. If such conveyance :s impossible, the construction of a "mountable" berm with 5:1 slopes will be permitted.. The filter cloth utilized shall be a woven or nonwoven fabric consisting only of continuous chain polymeric filaments or yarns 'of polyester. The fabric shall be inert to commonly encountered chemicals and hydrocarbons, be mildew and rot resistant, and conform to the physical properties noted in Table 3.02-A. Maintenance The entrance shall be maintained in a condition which will prevent tracking or flow of mud onto public rights -of -way. This may require periodic top .dressing with additional stone or the washing and reworking of existing stone as conditions demand and repair and/or cleanout of any structures used to trap sediment. All materials spilled, dropped, washed, or tracked from vehicles onto roadways or into storm drains must be removed immediately. The use of water trucks to remove materials dropped, washed, or tracked onto roadways will not be permitted under any circumstances. �. 1992 3.02 1 . STONE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 70' MIN. EXISTING A 3 PAVEMENT ,r 5:1 FILTER CLOTH 6• SIN A HOUNTABLE BERM (CIPTIONAL) SIDE ELEVATION EXISTING GROUND 70' FAIN, D WASHRACK 10' MIN. I (OPTIONAL) i ��+w.� Ji•.r+�+.... ice. � It 1 � � 1 •"" """ SECTION A -A REINFORCED CONCRETE SECTION B-B Source: Adapted from 1983 Maryland Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control, and Va. DSWC DRAIN SPACE Plate 3.02-1 • Mail to: Department of Planning Attn: County Planner 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5651 Request For Site Plan Comments Department of Planning and Development and Development Hand deliver to: 107 N. Kent Street Fourth Floor Winchester, VA (540) 665-5651 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479 4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: _ East_gate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center to be constructed in two (2) phases Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia Planning and Development's Comments: Date received _ Incomplete — Date reviewed _ Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Planninu and Development use only Date revision received Date approved Incomplete Date reviewed n LJ Request For Site Plan Comments Frederick County Engineering Department Mail to: Frederick County Engineering Attn: Director of Engineering 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5643 Hand deliver to: Dept. 107 N. Kent Street Fourth Floor Winchester, VA (540) 665-5643 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Address: Monarch Tower Suite1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sg. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases. FnninaPrinn nPnartmPnt's Cnmments- L , ✓vJ C ( T / 'i,a-- Date received 10.31/0�2 Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) En2ineerin2 Department Ilse only Date revision received Date approved z Incomplete Dane reviewed _ COMMONWEALTH of VIR QINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 November 22, 2002 — Fax Transmittal TO Mr. Sean O'Brien C/O I DI Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road N.E. Atlanta, GA 30326 Fax #404-479-4001 FROM Ben H. Lineberry, Jr., P.E. (540-984-5605) SUBJECT Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Commerce Center Route 522, Front Royal Pike Frederick County JERRYA. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 A VDOT response to a meeting held yesterday (11/21/02) to discuss progress status on the subject project: • The standard Frederick County Site Plan Comment Form for agency review was not included in original site plans submittal to this office. In order to expedite the review process, VDOT released a letter to Triad Engineering on 09/04/02 (copy attached with sketch) to provide for construction entry access to the site via Route 800, Rainville Road. The first paragraph of the 09/24/02 letter was continued on an addendum to previous VDOT comments dated 11/05/02 (copy attached), also to Triad Engineering. That letter included all VDOT comments which were appropriate for site plan stage at the time (including Brad Price, P.E.). • We are providing copies of the above letters to Mr. Jeremy Camp of Frederick County in hopes they will be sufficient support of VDOT's concerns at this stage of development. It is satisfactory to proceed with on site construction at this time. However, as indicated in Item 2d. of our 09/24/02 letter, if connection entrance at Route 522 is approved, all construction must be completed prior to opening site use. We trust this will clarify the VDOT position at this stage of develop please call. xc: Mr. Dave Heironimus Mr. Paul Ehrenberg Mr. Brad Price Mr. Jeremy Camp (faxed) FFlenl. 11 U1C1C d1C C111 RECEIVED NOV 2 5 2002 FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT tions, VirginiaDOT.org Total Pages = 5, including transmittal WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING N Post -it' Fax Note 7g71 Date 11 9P5►► ((�7 TNY (((Jc7 rom Co./Dept Co. Phone II Phone A Fax N V Fax It COMMONWEA Li H ®l V IR(jI NIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 September 24, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering P. 0. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 Ref: Access - Route 800 (Rainville Road), Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRYA. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is interested in finalizing comments in reference to the location of Home Depot within Eastgate Commerce Center. Additional information is forthcoming which will assist in the finalization of the comments. VDOT will comment on the following: 1. Current Route 800 (Rainville Road) is adequate for a constriction entry. 2. VDOT can support the use of Route 800 as a constriction entry provided the following is agreed to: a. Prior to opening of Home Depot, an approved roadway system must be installed according to VDOT specifications. b. The roadway system could be either the existing Route 800 or the proposed Route 522 intersection. c. If Route 800 is identified as the main access, an examination will be required to identify the suitability of the roadway for the proposed traffic. Also, any proffers specific to the rezoning of the Eastgate Commerce Center may be activated and completed as required. In addition; it is recognized there may be other items required Zn reference to traffic impact. d. If the connection to Route 522 is approved, all construction must be completed prior to opening. 1 e. There will not be any agreements to abandonments, discontinuance of maintenance, etc. on Route 800 until a final design is agreed upon. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, fome'rT.'Collli iaii Transportation Assistant lcsidcnt Engineer H FC/rf xc: NIF. Dave IIcir-onimus, Mr. Bill Siover, Mr. Sam C1ernpMr. lyric Lawrence, Mr. Allan Hudson VirginiaDOT.org 1VE KEEP VIRGiNIA MOVING \ 'SWAT R VALVE \\ (1 )\ F I RE \,HYD AN (2 ) \WATERS 11 VAL ES \�\\ L- A PROPOSED TURN AROUND I Rs' RELOCATION \ PROPOSED \ UNDERGROUND 0 ELECTRIC TO BE TIED IN TO \ EXISTING \ 12 8" PROPOSED �\ \ EI 4" GAS LINE \ \ TO Bit- TIED IN TO EXISTING �' -- IRS WOODLANDS \ CORRIDOR 20' DRAINAGE ESMT INST. # 010009112 \ RAINVILLE RD. 60 R/W -RONT BUILDING SETBACK — — F. D. C. 4" PIPE 4" CHECK VALVE W/ BALL DRIP IN PRECAST CONC. VAULT pCc\' cGv A banacn ex6s� R (w a-c�cv' new culdc:sac In Puce S2�O� 248"W 15' POTOMAC EDISON \ CO. ESMT. 875/1006 \ \ \ \ PROPOSED GO/ EASEMENT Now 32" DIA WATER \ p STORAGE TANK -E \ �� 75' FRONT BUILDING SETBACK \ \j X — _ — -- -� �? 50.- "33 W L x W L f t ER T CDAAULT wiL J 20 SAN. SEW. ESMT. IRS INST. # 010009112 I R S 0' . W#TOR000M 12 R 55' -Temp. C onfs � lEnV rINg' TY P. \ I/ ( TEE sbou \d 16c� s PosskUc� cuc'b an8 \ -A- E a s l c c to r c m n u c R 20' �i` tFt(�� ►� �r DEAD -El C�e3r Silt- Cvm?� I1 ` �EMP. TURN Aon FH .. r� r,.�r _. ..�I \`�lf�t, i-•n iini \i,. PUMP -/OUS C R 30' _FH E \ ,,�o� F COMMONWEALTH of V1IRQJI T1IA Philip A. Shucet COMMISSIONER Novernber 5, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg - C/O Triad Engineering P. 0. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE EDINBURG, VA 22824 Ref: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Commerce Center Route 522, Front Royal Pike Frederick County Addendum to Previous VDOT Comments Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The following comments/recommendations have been generated within VDOT review units and are presented for inclusion into your revision of plans for VDOT road improvements associated with the referenced project. • Plan profile sheets should be provided for Route 522 which reflect the current geometric conditions as well as the proposed additions/improvements to compliment the Home Depot roadway access. Among the items which should be addressed is the drainage runoff from Moranto Manor Drive onto the Route 522 intersection. • The existing turn lanes, tapers and crossover at the proposed intersection of Route 522 and Moranto Manor Drive should be reconstructed following VDOT's Road Design Manual; Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways dated September 9, 2002 for the anticipated high volume of truck traffic usage for the road facilities, proposed and existing to be modified. The proposed pavement design should present alternate considerations. o Alternate A) Cement Concrete Structure o Alternate B) Asphalt Concrete Structure for VDOT review and consideration. VDOT standard CG-13 entrances should be provided at the Route 522 intersection with NloI-anto Manor Drive and the commercial entrarice to the Home Depot site from ivlOranto Manor DrIVC. VirciniaDOT.ora 1�'� VCC rJ L'i CIi` I NI I A 1,4"MINI(= Nfr. Paul Ehrenberg ` Ref: Home Depot Distribution Center i November 5, 2002 Page Two • The portion of Moranto Manor Drive being proposed with the site plan should be constructed in accordance with VDOT Geometric Design Standard GS-6. • A note should be affixed to the plan which absolves VDOT from all responsibility from maintenance of all stonnwater management detention facilities constructed for this site. • Current unaltered VDOT General Notes numbered V 1. through V21. (copy attached) should be displayed on the plan cover sheet. • The Traffic Impact Analysis is currently under review in our offices. It may be prudent to delay a revision of the plan for review pending VDOT comments centering on TIA. Whenever all the above comments have been considered by your office, you may submit two copies of revised plan sheets for road and entrance improvements only to this office for VDOT review. If there are any questions, please call. Sincerely, Batty J. S%veitzcr Trans. Roadway Engineer For: Ben H. Lineberry Trans. Ass't. Resident Engineer B J S/i-f Attachment xc: Mr. Sam Clem Mr. David Morris Mr. Brad Price Mr. Dave Heironimus November 19, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 M cotv"�v COUNTY of F REDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 FAX: 540/ 665-6395 FAXED November 19, 2002 TO: 540-667-2260 Re: 2"" Review Comments, Home Depot Distribution Center; Site Plan #37-02 Property Identification Number (PIN) 76-A-53 Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: I have completed a review of the revised plan and would like you to address a few issues in a revision. Please note the comments I have made below. Review Comments l . Please note on Sheets C-13A and C-8A that pavement details for the fire lanes are on Sheet C-20. 2. Please reference the deed book and page number or instrument number for the woodlands and steep slope protection casement. 3. Please note on the site plan that during construction, a substantial physical barrier, such as a snow fence, should be established on site to delineate the woodlands corridor and steep slope protection easement and to prevent its disturbance. 4. Prior to site plan approval, please provide a copy of the recorded plat creating the subject parcel. 5. Please note planning and zoning approval for occupancy permits for the facility will not be issued until all approved roadway system improvements have been completed. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 0 Page 2 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E., Triad Engineering Re: Home Depot Distribution Center, Site Plan 937-02 November 19, 2002 6. Please note that the zoning ordinance requires raised islands at the ends of all parking bays. Raised landscaped islands with curb and gutter should be added to the ends of the trailer staging/storage parking bays on the northern portion of the site. 7. On the landscape plan, Sheet C-45, please indicate what types of buffers and screens are required. Please provide cross sections or profiles for required buffers and screens. 8. A single row of evergreen trees, planted eight feet apart, should be provided on the southern portion of the site to ensure adequate screening of trailer loading/dock parking. After you have revised the site plan, please resubmit one copy so that I may verify the information contained on the plan. I will then need all approved review agency comment sheets and five copies of the final site plan for approval. Comment sheets are required from the following agencies: Building Inspections Department; Frederick County Engineer (Public Works); Frederick County Fire Marshal; Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT); Frederick County Sanitation Authority; and the Winchester Regional Airport. If you have any questions concerning this review, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I - -- RAR/bah cc: Industrial Developments International, Inc. Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road, NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Patrick Barker, Economic Development Commission Director U \RcbcccASitc Plans\IlotncDcpot\SccondRcvicw wpd 1 TRAN3,1ISSION VERIFICATION REPORT �� TIME 11/19/2002 14:55 NAME FRED CO PLANNING DEP FAX 5406656395 TEL 5406655651 SER.0 BROC2J178677 DATE, TIhr1E 11/19 14: 55 FAX NO. /1,1011E 96672260 DURATION 00: 00 : 39 PAGE(S) 02 RESULT MODE STANDARD ECM November 19, 2002 M..r. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering P.O. Box 2397 Wi.nchester., Virginia. 22604 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 FAXED November 19, 2002 TO: 540-667-2260 R.e: 2n' Review Comments, Home Depot Distribution Center; Site Plan #37-02 Property Identification Number (PIN) 76-A.-53 Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: J have completed a review of the revised plan and would like you to address a few issues in a revision. Please note the comments 1 have made below. Review CQmxnents Please note on Sheets C-13A and C-8A that pavement details for the fire lanes are on Sheet C-20. P.O. Box 2397 _ :;IAi) Winchester, VA 22604 Phone 540-667-9300 FAX 540-667-2260 October 31, 2002 Ms. Rebecca Ragsdale Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Home Depot Distribution Center Eastgate Industrial Development Triad Project No. CD-075 Dear Ms. Ragsdale: The following represents Triad Engineering, Inc. response to your enumerated comments in your correspondence dated September 25, 2002 (attached) and your plan sheet "mark ups". We are responding on a point by point basis to correlate with your comments. ✓1. Fire hydrants are shown on sheets C-8A, C-9A, C-10A, C-12A, C-13A and C-18. Bollards are required at all hydrant locations, see detail on sheet C-22. Fire lanes are shown on the pavement markings plan sheet C-20. ,/2. Triad has prepared the subdivision plat. Eastgate Developers will submit a bond to guarantee the costs associated with construction of Moranto Manor Drive. ✓3. Dimensions, boundaries, widths, pavement construction, etc. are shown on sheets C-7A, C-8A, C-14, C-15, C-41, C-42 for the proposed construction of the Home Depot Entrance and Moranto Manor Drive up to, and including, the Cul-de-sac. The extension of Moranto Manor Drive from the Cul-de-sac west to its connection with Rainville Road will be designed for the Eastgate Developers at a future time. Home Depot is in the process of designing the Moranto Manor Drive/Route 522 intersection as a separate contract, and is coordinating that effort with VDOT. For the purpose of obtaining an Earth Disturbance permit and a building permit, all construction vehicles will enter the site viaRainville Road - as per VDOT correspondence dated September 24, 2002 (attached). 4. PIN's and zoning designations have been added. See sheets C-3 and C-4. Global Acquisition Partner's, LP is the correct name for the property immediately north of the site. There as been no recorded transfer of ownership to Adelphia Cable. = C -- I .F,LVED 0§t 33�0.M2 FR p�Apy� AEN1 Triad Engineering, Inc. Morgantown • St. Albans Greensburg Hagerstown Winchester • Harrisonburg • Purcellville West Virginia Pennsylvania Maryland Virginia is Frederick County Department of Planning and Development Home Depot Distribution Center RE: TRIAD Project No. CD-075 October 31, 2002 Page 2 5. The Eastgate Development Proffers are now listed on sheet C-3. A Traffic Impact Analysis is being performed by Vettra Co. of Woodbrige, VA; a copy of which will be submitted to VDOT for their approval. Vettra has had several meetings and telephone discussions with VDOT and has VDOT's approval of the Scope of Work required for this site. v 6. The only trash receptacle is a self contained trash compactor which is accessible only through the building. Screening for a self contained unit should not be necessary. 7. FAR ratio is 1.0. Phase - 556,000 sf building = 17.36 acres/61.01 lot area = 0.285 P" - Phase I & Phase II = 1,008,000 sf building = 23.14 acres/81.71 lot area = 0.283 8. Parking space Calculations are as follows: I space/employee (warehousing/truck terminal) I space/250 sf floor area (general office) Employees = 135 first shift . + 62 second shift 41 197 + 50 (12,5000 sf office)/250 247 required 252 provided 9. Plan set now shows Auto Parking, Trailer staging/storage parking, and trailer loading dock parking. See Sheet C-4. 10. There will be NO Environmental areas disturbed beyond the Woodlands/Steep slopes corridor line established per Frederick Co. Planning Letter dated April 26, 2002 (attached) or beyond the Wetlands impact area of 0.47 acres or the impacted streambed of 1494 LF as per COE Permit NWP 39-(02-80082). Attached. 11. Landscape calculations are now shown on sheet C- 45. Evergreen hedges are now incorporated along the east and a portion of the north ends of the automobile parking lot. 12. The North Virginia Power Company easement has been released via release by The Potomac Edison Company release dated April 25, 2001 (attached). The tree and stream protection easement is referenced on sheet C-3 and is also shown on all affected sheets as the Woodlands Corridor And Steep Slope Protection Easement. 13. A notation has been included on plan sheet C-4 which states that site plan submission and approval will be required prior to construction of Phase II. Frederick County Department of Planning and Development Home Depot Distribution Center RE: TFUnD Project No. CD-075 October 31, 2002 Page 3 Other - We will submit copies of all Agency review comment sheet approvals and five copies of the final site plan once all comments have been addressed. As per our telephone discussion of 10/22/02, we have moved the trees from behind the stored trailers to other locations within the site. We have maintained the required count. Please find enclosed one (1) set of REVISED Site Plans which incorporate all Review Agency comments including the above responses. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us at 540-667-9300. Very Truly Yours, TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. Paul H. E enberg, P.E. Director of Engineering Enclosed: Cc: Sean O'Brien, IDI S:\WordPerfect\Home Depot.FCDPD.wpd • 0 COMMONWEALTH of VIRCjI IA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE JERRY A. COPP COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 RESIDENT ENGINEER September 24, 2002 TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 Ref: Access - Route 800 (Rainville Road), Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is interested in finalizing comments in reference to the location of Home Depot within Eastgate Commerce Center. Additional information is forthcoming which will assist in the finalization of the comments. VDOT will comment on the following: 1. Current Route 800 (Rainville Road) is adequate for a construction entry. 2. VDOT can support the use of Route 800 as a construction entry provided the following is agreed to: a. Prior to opening of Home Depot, an approved roadway system must be installed according to VDOT specifications. IQ The roadway system could be either the existing Route 800 or the proposed Route 522 intersection. c. If Route 800 is identified as the main access, an examination will be required to identify the suitability of the roadway for the proposed traffic. Also, any proffers specific to the rezoning of the Eastgate Commerce Center may be activated and completed as required. In addition, it is recognized there may be other items required in reference to traffic impact. (dam If the connection to Route 522 is approved, all construction rust be completed prior to opening. e. There will not be any agreements to abandonments, discontinuance of maintenance, etc. on Route 800 until a final design is agreed upon. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, c• omer F. o an Transportation Assistant esident Engineer H FC/rf xc: Mr. Dave Heironimus, Mr. Bill Stover, Mr. Sam Clem, Mr. Eric Lawrence, Mr. Allan Hudson VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Jul 10 02 10:08a g. W. l i (ford & assoc. 540#5-0493 p. 2 COUNTY of ; REMERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-56s1 FAX: 540/ 66S-6395 April 26, 2002 Gilbert W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Attn: Charles Maddox 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE WAIVER AT EASTGATE COMMERCE CENTER Dear Chuck: This letter is to confirm that your request for a waiver of the steep slope disturbance requirement of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance was approved by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on April 22, 2002. The subject area is located in the southern portion of the Eastgate Commerce Center in the Shaw -nee Magisterial District. The steep slope waiver would apply to the 235.75-acre master planned project, zoned B2 (Business General), B3 (Industrial Transition), and MI (Light Industrial). 1) A survey description for the "preservation area" is required to ensure that subsequent site development plans do not encroach into this area. If you ave any questions regarding the approval of this waiver, please feel free to call this office. Since ely, J � . Eric R. Lawrence, AICP Deputy Director ERL/ch cc: W. Harrington Smith, Jr., Shawnee District Supervisor Robert A. Morris, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District Planning Commissioner Jane Anderson, Real Estate o ��K<„a�,�n �.Nr,�� ur��w.�rvL•R_PYEAfFRliasrgaic Ccmm<rcc Cu.wpl 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-S000 Jul OS 02 04:57p g.W.0lifford & assoc 06-20-2002 03:30PI FRUI t"�HKLEGGE LAND Sl1RGEY0R TO PLAT SHOWING i TREE & STR AM PROTECTION EA�EMENT OIV THE LAND OF WRiGHT S RUh L.P. DEED BOOK 719 PAGE 642 ?i OPEQUON MAGISTERI/}L DISTRICT 540WS-0493 ff/1-6 Q 7223520 P.02 'Z,TH O ``vy, Dougglas C. Legge 46. 001197 p.2 ,j-04-02 02:00pm From- • • LnLU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk District Northern Virginia Field Office 18139 Triangle Plaza, Suite 213 Dumfries, VA 2-2026:- F, Project Number: 02-B0082 1. Participant: Wrights Run Limited Partnership, Inc. Attn: Mr. Allan Hudson Suite 803 2800 Shirlington Road Arlington, VA 22206 T-200 P.02/08 F-112 September 3, 2002 Waterway: WrightRun SEP - 4 2002 2. Authorized Agent Wetland Studies and SolutioN& D STUDIES AND Attn: Mr. Ian Smith 501.[1TIONS, INC. 14088-M Sullyfreld Circle Chantilly, VA 20151 3. Project Location: The project is located on an approximately 83 acre parcel southwest of the intersection of Tasker I-ane and Route 522, east of Stephens City in Frederick County, Virginia. 4. Project Description: The project consists of the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States associated with the commercial development of the subject tract. The project is called Home Depot Distribution Center. Approximately 0.47 acre of jurisdictional areas, comprised of 0.22 acre palustrine emergent wetlands, 0.03 acre palustdne open water and 0.21 acre (1490 linear feet) intermittent stream channels, will be impacted by the proposed work. A contribution to the Virginia Wetlands Restoration Trust Fund is planned for mitigation. 5. Findings This is in reference to your request to perform work in the waters of the United States as described above. This activity has been reviewed and found to satisfy the criteria contained in the Corps Nationwide Permit Number (39), attached. (The Corps Nationwide Permits were published in the Federal Register (67 FIR 2020) on January 15, 2002 as corrected by Federal Register (67 FR 6692) on February 13, 2002 and Federal Register (67 FIR 8579) on February 25, 2002 and the regulations governing their use can be found in 33 CFR 330 published in Volume 56, Number 226 of the Federal Register dated November 22, 1991.) Provided the enclosed conditions are met, an individual Department of the Army Permit will not be required. The work will be performed in accordance with the Pre -Construction Notification dated .lulu 2, 2002. Proof of contribution of 316:+,800 from the Vir inia Wetlands Restoration Trust Fund will be provided prior to any work in iurisdictional areas. In addition, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality has provided 401 certification for Nationwide Permit Number (39). You may contact the Virginia Marine Resources Commission at (757) 247-2200 for further information concerning their permit requirements. Enclosed is a "compliance certification" form, which must be signed and returned within 30 days of completion of the project, including any required mitigation. Your signature on this form certifies that you have completed the work in accordance with the nationwide permit terms and conditions. This verification is valid until March 18, 2007, unless the Norfolk District Engineer uses discretionary authority to modify, suspend or revoke this verification. The Chief of Engineers will periodically review the nationwide permits and their conditions and will decide to either modify, reissue or revoke the permits. If the nationwide permit verified in this letter is reissued without modification or if your activity complies with any subsequent nationwide permit, the expiration date of this verification will not change. However, if the nationwide permit verified in the letter is modified or revoked so that the activity listed above would no longer be authorized and you have commenced or are under contract to commence the work, you will have twelve months from the date of that permit change to complete the activity. Activities completed under the authorization of a nationwide permit which was in effect at the time the activity was completed continue to be authorized by that nationwide permit. It is your responsibility to remain informed of changes to the nationwide permits. We will issue a special public notice announcing any changes to the nationwide permits when they occur. 6. Corps Contact: Mr. Ron Stouffer at 703-221-6967 NAO FL 13 REVISED DEC 90 ruce F. Williams Chief, Northern Viryinia egulatory Section Nationwide Permit (39) Residential, Commercial, and Institutional Developments (3/18/2002) Discharges of dredged orfill material into non -tidal waters of the U.S., excluding non - tidal weuands adjacent to tidal waters, forme construction or expansion of residential, commercial, and institutional building foundations and building pads and attendant features that are necessary for the use and maintenance of the structures. Attendant features may include, but are not limited to, roads, parking lots, garages, yards, utility lines, stormwater managementfad fties, and recreation facilities such as playgrounds, ptaying fields, and golf courses (provided the golf course is an integral part of the residential development). The construction of new sad areas or oil and gas wells is not authorized by this NWP. Residential developments include multiple and single unit developments. Examples of commercial developments Include retail stones, industrial facilities, restaurants, business parks, and shopping centers. Examples of institutional developments include schools, fire stations, govemment office buildings, judicial buildings, public works buildings, libraries, hospitals, and places of worship. The activities listed above are authorized, provided the activities meetall of the following criteria: a. The discharge does not cause the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of non -tidal waters of the U.S., excluding non -tidal wetlands adjacent to tidal waters; b. The discharge does not cause the lass of greater than 300 llnear-feet of a stream bed, unless for intermittent stream reds this criterion is waived in writing pursuant to a determinatlon by the District Engineer, as specdied below, that the project complies with all terms and conditions of this NWP and that any adverse impacts of the project on the aquatic environment are minimal, both individually and cumulatively; c. The permittee must notify the District Engineer in accordance with General Condition 13, if a ny e the following criteria are met: (1)The discharge causes the loss of greater than 1/10-acre of non -tidal waters of the US, excluding non -tidal wetlands adjacent to tidal waters; or (2) The discharge car:ses the loss of any open waters, including perennial or Vi termittent streams, below the ordinary high water mark (see Note, below); or (3) The discharge causes the loss of greater than 300 Irneerfeet of intermittent stream bed. In such case, to be authorized the District Engineer must determine that the activity complies with the other terms and conditions of the NWP, determine adverse environmental effects are minimal both individually and cumulatively, and waive the limitation on stream impacts in writing before tihe permittee may proceed; d. For discharges in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, the notification must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites; e. The discharge is part of a single and complete project; f. The permittee must avoid and minimize discharges into waters of the US at the project site to the maximum extent practicable. The notification, when required, must Include a written Statement explaining how avoidance and mlnimizatan of losses of waters of the US vkeem achieved on the project site. Compensatory mitigation will normally be required to offset the Iosses of waters of the US. (See General Condition 19.) The notification must also include a compensatory mitigab on proposal for offsetting unavoidable losses of waters of the US. If an applicant asserts that the adverse effects of the project are minimal without mitigation, then the applicant may submit justification explaining why compensatory mitigation should not be required for the District Engineer's consideration; g. When this NWP is used in conjunction with any other NWP, any combined total permanent loss of waters of the US exceeding 1/10-ame requires that the permittee notify the District Engineer in accordance with General Condition 13; h. Any work authorized by this NWP must not cause more than minimal deg radatlon of water quality or more than minimal changes to the flow characteristics of anystream (see General Conditions 9 and 21); For discharges causing the loss of 1/10-acre or less of waters of the US, the permittee must submit a report, within 30 days of completion of the work, to the District Engineer that contains the following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the permittee; (2) The location of the work, (3) A description of the work; (4) The type and acreage of the loss of waters of the US (e.g., 1/12-acre of emergent wetlands); and (3) The type and acreage cf any compensatory mltlgation used to offsettbe loss of waters of the US (e g., 1/12-acre of emergent wetlands created on -site); j. If there are any open waters or streams within the project area, the permittes will establish and maintain, to the maximum extent practicable, we6and or upland vegetated buffers next to those open waters or streams consistentwitfh General Condition 19. Deed restrictions, conservation easements, protective covenants, or other means of sand conservation and preservation are required to protect and maintain the vegetated buffers established on the project site. 0 a T a a • only residential, commercial, and institutional activities with structures on the foundation(s) or building pad(s), as well as the attendant features, are authorized by this NWP. The compensatory mitigation proposal that is required in paragraph (f) of this NWP may be either conceptual or detailed. The wetland or upland vegetated buffer required in paragraph (j) of this NWP will be determined on a • case -try -case basis by the District Engineer for addressing water quality concems. The required wetland or upland vegetated buffer is part of the overall compensatory mitgabort req ui rement for this NWP. If the project site was previously used for agricultural purposes and the farm ownerJaperator used NWP N 40 to authorize activities in waters of the United States to increase praduction or o construct farm buildings, NWP 39 cannot be used by the developer to authorize additional activities in waters of the United States on the project site in excess of � the acreage limit for NWP 39 (i.e., the combined acreage loss authorized under NWPs 39 and 40 cannot exceed 112acre). SYtbdivWo= For residential subdivisions, the aggregate total loss of waters of US authorized by NWP 39 can not exceed 1/2-acre. This includes any loss of waters ! associated with developmentof individual subdivision lots. (Sections 10 and 4G4) N Note: Areas where wetland vegetation is not present should be determined by the presence or absence of an ordinary high water mariC or bed and bank. Areas that are waters of the US based on this viterian would require a PCN although water is infrequently present in tfine stream channel (except for ephemeral waters, which do not require PCNs under paragraph (c)(2), above; however, activities that result in the I oss of greater than 1/10 acre of ephemeral waters would require FCNs under paragraph (c)(1), above). GENERAL CONDITIONS: Tbc Friho+ving general conditions must be follotwcd in order for tmy authorization by aMVP to b--valid: l . l\,avieaticxm. No zc1hity may cans more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. 2. Proper Maintenance. Any suucture or fill authorized shall be properly mainta'incd, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 3. Soi I Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erasion and sediment controls must be used and ma'inra)ncd in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fins, as ++ell as anyDoerk below the ordinary higb x+•ater mark orbigh tide litre, must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. Perminecs are encouraged to perform xwrk within waters of Me United States during periods of low-fl(nv or no -flow. 4. Aquai is Life. Movcrnrarts. No wh•ity may substantially disrupt the net-ssary life -cycle roo)-cmenu of thosespccies of aquatic life indigenous to the,waierbody, including diosespecies ,chch normally migrate through the area, unless the aUivity's primary purpose is to impound ,vale[. Culverts placed art streams rnus b- installed to maintain ]oxv flow conditions. 5. Fguipment Heavy equipment xsnrfcing in +vetlmds must be placed on mats, or other measurrs must be taken to minim.=soil disrurbancc. b. Rceiona] and Caste B)•-Case Conditions. 7be activity Must comply With any regional conditions ,vhich may have b:cn added by thcdivision engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and „iih any ease spccifc conditions added by the Corps or by theStatc or tribe in its Section 401 water quality certification and Coastal Zone Management Ac( orinsistency dcicrmination. 7. 11 Od and Scenic River;. No adivhy may occurm a component of theNationd Wild and Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study rive for passible ioclusion in the syslern, ,while dteri,er is in an offleW study status; tmlessthe appropriate Federal agency, with direc', management responsibility for such river. has determined in writingtha( the proposed a-;ivhy mill not adversely afTW the Wild and Scenic River designation, or study status. Information on'Aild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land managerrrcnl agency in the area (e.g, National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of land Managcmcnl, U-S. Fish end Wildlife Service). S. Tribal itie)rLs. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including but not fiotitcd to, r s rued +vertu rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights. 9. 1VricrQuid im (a) In certain States and tribal lands an individud 401 water quality certification must be obtained orm-aiwed (So-, 33 CFR330.4(c)). (b) For NY.rPs 12, 14, 17, 19, 32, 39, 40, 42143, and 44, ++mere the State or tribal401 ocrtifica?ion (either gear celly or individuaUy) does not require or approve a w,•atcr quality management plan, the permittee must include design criteria and =hnigtxs that ,mill ensure that the authorized work does not result in more than minimal degradation of wjtrr quality (or the Corps determines that compliance meth state or local s=- lords, where applicable, will ensure no more th an minimal adven effect an,vater quality ). An important component of water quality managanatit includes slormwatu management that minimizes degradation of the downstream aquatic system, including ,vatcr quality (refer to C-crim , Condition 2) for storm,valermmaacniml requarmetits). Another important component of,vater quality management is the establishment and maintenance of vegetated buffers next to open warms, including streams {refer to Gureral Condition )9for vegetated buffer requirements f or thaN1'VPs). to_ Coastal zone Manaeerncnt. In certain states, an individual slate coastal zonamanagemcnt consistency concurrence must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330Afd)). 11. Endangered SMits. (a) No activity is authorized under anyN'11rP which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species era species proposed forsuch design�ian, as identified uoder theFeder-al Endangered Species Act, or which will da'7oy or advcascly modify the critical habitat ofsucti species. Non-federal petmitiees shall notify the District i-ngmccr if any listed species ordesignatcd critical habitat might be affected or is in fire vicinity of the project, or is loca(ed in the designated critical habitat and shall not begin„vrk on the activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the Endangacd Species Act have been suisfrod and that the activity is authorized. For activities that may affect Federally- L listed endangered or thr> alened specira or dcsignated critical habitat, the notification Must include o the nam .(s) of the endangered err duratencd species that ropy be afdbczed by the proposed work or i that ti ilizc the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. As aTestili N of formal or informal consultation -with the FWS orNN -S, the District Engmeermay add spcej s- 0 specific regional endangered species mnMons to the N' ArPs. ^' (b) Authorization of an acbvit rby a nation„ide parmil does not authorize the" take" of a o thrca(encd orcndangered species as defined tmdcr theFederal Endangered Specie, AcL In the 30 absence of scparalc authorization (e.g., an ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological Opinion with 'incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the U.S. Fish and )hildl ife Sen�ce or the National Marine Fisheries Servim both lethal and non -lethal "Likes" ofprouded species are in violation ofthe o Endangered Species Act. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and 3 their critical habitat can be obtained directly from the offices of the U.S. Fish and NVildtite Service and National h9arine Fisheries Service ortbeir world wide web pages at h_pu:/A,.w",.flvs.gov/r9cndspplcndsppJitmi and httu'/ln1,m nmfs Roar 2o+/reel res/mVervieu•/es.htmt respectivdy. 12. ITistar)cProperties. No activity which may affect historic properties listed, or eligiblefor listing, in theNational Rsgistet of KsloucPlaces is authorized, until the DE has complied ivill the provisions of 33 CFR Part 325, Appendix C. The prospective permince must notify the DistricA Eriginrcr if the authorized activity may affect any historic properties listed, determined to be chZible, or vrhich the prospective permitter has reason to believe may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and shall not begin the activity until notified by the District Engir=rtha(the rcquiremems ofthcNatioaal Historic Preservation Act have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. information on the location and existence of historic resources can be obtained from titre State HishoricPr> servation Offrcc and tkNational Rrgisler ofHu-toric Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)). Foractivities that tray affect historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing in. the National Register of NisioricPlaces, the notification must stattwhich historic property may be affected by the proposed , wk- or include a vicinity map indicating the location of me hislorieproprrty. 13. Notification. (a) Timing: Where required by theterms of thcN1VP, the prospective permittee mast notify the DistrictFngincerwith a prcconsttuction notification (PCN) as early as possible. The District Engurcer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 days ofthe dateofrecerpt and can request the additional information ncoessary to make, the PCN complete only once. However, if me prospectivepcmtitiee does not provide all afthe requested informal ion, then the District Erigincer,vill nolifvthe, prosporAvepermitlxthat thoPCN is still inoompletz and the PCN review process,vill not conr..nce until all of the requested information has been received by rn the District Engin= The prospective permium shall not begin the activity_ (1) Until notified in writing by LhoDistr3cl Engineer that the autivity MBY Plocced under the • NWP with any spec)al conditions imposed by the District or Division Engineer, or (2) )f notified in waiting by the District or Division Engin—that an individual permit is required; or (3) Unless 45 days havepassed from the District Engineer's receipt ofthe complete notification and thcprospectivepermittee has notreceiwcd mitten notice from the Distinct or Division Fnoinecr. Subsequently, the pcmmitiee's fight to proceed uoda the N'1VP may be o modified, suspended, orTcvok d only in axordanccwith the procedure set forth in 33 CFR o 330.5(d)(2). (b) Contents of Notification: Thenotificatim must be in writing and include the following o information: (1) Name, address, and telephone numbers ofthe prospective permiMcq (2) Location of the proposed project; (3) Bricf dcsvaiptioo of4te proposed project; draprojcct'spurpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects theprojert,vould cause; any odw NlVP(s), Xgional general permd(s), or individual perrnh(s) used or intended to be used to a111110 Many part of the ^� proposed project orany related activity. Sketclics should beprovided when nocessmy 10 show that the activity oamplits with the temu of then` T (Sketches usually clarify the project and whim provided result in a qui&a dcci sion.); (4) for N WPs 7, 12, 14, 18, 21, 343 38. 39, 40, 41, 42, and 43, lime PCN must also include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, roctutGrtg wetlands. veoctatsrl shallows (c.g, submerged aquatic vegrtaiioa scagrass beds), and riffle and pool ocmplemccs (see Paragraph )3(f)); (5) For Nl�P 7 (0utfalI Structwes and Maintaancc), the PCN must include information rcgardirig the original design capacities and co of, gu rati o rts of tbosc areas ofthc facility whet maintcnancc, drrdpng or ex cavalion is proposed. (6) For N\%T 14 (LiocarTransporation Projcc s). the PCN must include a compensatory mitigatan proposal to ofbciprsmanani losses Oftvaters of the United States and a statcment describuigbowtrmpwrary losses of waters of the United States will be minimized to the maximum e+.icvmt practicable. (7) For NtVP 21 (Surface Coal Mining Aclivitics), the PCN must include an Office of Surface 1"ining (OSM) or stale approt•cd mitigation plan, ifapplicable. To be authorized by this NW, the District Enginccrmus7 ducmnine tbal the activity complies mrith the turns and conditions of the AWP and that the advusc environmental effects are minimal both individually and cumulalivcl)• and must notif)•the prvjeet sponsorof this determination in writing, (8) for NRP 27 (Stream and Welland Restoration Activities), the PCN must include documentation of the prior condition oftlx sit: that will be reverted b�, the perminec. (9) For NVAP 29 (Singic-Family Housing), the PCN must also include: @Any past use of this MW by the individual permittcx and/or the permit(ee's spouse; (ii)A Amemetmt that the sinol0familyhousin3,ac1nvity is for a Personal residence ofthe permittcc; i�A description of the entire parcel, including its size, and a delinraiion ofwetlands. Fo Qr the purpose of this N'Vd', parcels of l and measuring'/. acre or less %vill not require a format on- s'tc dd;lincation. Howrvem, the applicant shall provide an indication of w'hcre them -Wands we and the amount of vttllands that exists on the property. For parcels greater than %acre in size, a formal wetland delineation must be prepared in accordance with the current mothod required by the Corps_ (See paragraph 13(1)); (v)A written description of all land (including, if available, legal de;criptiow) onmd by the Prospective. permittce and/or (heprosp,.cuve pertriitices spouse, within s one mile radius of the parcel, in any form ofownership (ncluding any land owned as a partner: corporation: jclrrt tarant, co-tamant, oral a trnant-b)-the-mlirety) and any land on which a purellm and sale aV=ncnt or other oontrxl for sail, or purchase has been exo:wed; (10) For N1kT 31 (' Maintenartceof £aistingFlood Control Facilties), the Pruspocifivc Pamitbx must either notify the DistrictEngineu mith aPCN prior to each maintenance activityor submit a fire year (or less) maintenancz plan. In addition, the PCN must include all ofthe following: (n) Sufficient baseline information so as to identify the approved Chanel depths and coqgutations and existing facilities. Minor deviations are authorized, provided the appim-od food control protection or drainage is not increased; (i) A delincation ofany affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands; and, C,ii) Location of the dredged material disposal site- (]]) For NN\T 33 (Tcmparary Construction, Access, and Dew•atcring), the PCN roust also include a restoration plan of reasonable measures to avoid and minimize adverse effects 10 aquisic resources. (12) For N%VPs 39, 43, and 44, the PCN muusl also include a Nwitun statement to the Distri el Engineer explaining holy avoidanceand minini¢ation of laa5es of waters of the United States were achieved on the projcctsite. st include a co (13) For MVP 39 and NWP 42, th,. PCN mumpensatoq mitigation �aposal to offs-,t losses of watcts of the US o7justi5z: lion explaining why compensaNrymidgation should not be,requirrd. For disatiargds that cause time loss of neaterthan 30D1'mear fed ofan - intermittcni stream bed, to be authorized, the District Engineer must determine that the activity complies with the other tcmm and conditions of die NVdrP, determine adverse environmental cfila:ts arc minimal both individuallyand cumulatively, and ,Asivethe limitation on stream impacts in writing beforcthe punjinpemay pmemd;. (14) FarNRP 40 (Agricultural Aexiviticsa the PCN must include a oompensatory mitigation proposal to offsd losses of cosmos afthe US. This NWP does got sutborize the relocation of gmatuthan 300 linear -feet ofeaisting serviceabk drainage ditches constructed in ton-tidaI streams amiss, for drainage ditches constructed in mtermittenl non -tidal slrearns,theDistrict Engineerw•aivcs thii criterion in writing, and the District Engineer has determined that d- project complies with all truths and conditions of this NV,`P, and that any adverse impacts of the project on the aquatic environment are minimal, both individually and cumulatively,. i (15) For NV,P 43 (Stormwater Matmgemenl Facilities), (be PCN must include, for the o construction of new stommatcr managerttent facilities, a maintenance plan (in accordance with o stale and local requirements, ifapplicable) and a compensatory mitigation Proposal to offset N losses of waters ofthe US. For discharges that eausethe loss of gnaterthan 300 linear fmt of an o intermittent stream bed, ro be authorized, the District Engineer must dctcrtnine that the activity tcmns and conditicros of theN%\T, detererminr adverse enviroamental o o oomplieswith the other effects are minimal both individually and cumulatively, and tvaivethe limitation on stream n impacts in writing before the permitlec may proceed; (16) For NNP 44 (Mining Activities), the PCh must include a description of all waters of time n United States adversely affected by the project, a description of mewms tat= to minimize o advmc effects to haters of the United Sues, a description of treasures faken to comply with the Ell criteria of the NWP, and areclamation plan (for aggregatemining, ac ivifcs in iSDI=d waters -tidal weltands adjacent to headwa(crs and any hard rca*niocral miningacli)-rtics). and non (17)For zaivities that may adversely affect Federally -listed utdangcred or Uuealtncd species. the PCN roust include the namc(s) of thosc endangered or threatened species that may be affcctod by die proposed vvori: or utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed wort;. (16) Foractivities that may affect historic ProPcr ks listed in, or eligible for lislina in, the National Register of Historic Places, the PCN must state wdiich hist0ricprOpertymay be affe:,ted by the proposed work or include a vicinitymap indicating tic location of One historic property. (c) Form ofNotificzlion: The standard individual permit application form (Form ENG 4345) may be used as the notification but must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and must include all of the information required in (b) (1)-(19) of General Condition 13. A letter containing the requisite irfam-im6on may also Ix used. (d) Distriu Engineer's Decision: In reviciingthc PCN for the proposed activity, the District Engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NnAT will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative advusc environmental effects err may be contrary to tc public interest. The prospec.re pemnittcomtay, optionaDy, submiE aproposod mitigation plan with the PCN to expedite the process and the District Engamecm will consider any proposed compensatory mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining wfietherthe net adverse cnviro=ental effects 10 the aquatic environment of the proposed work are minimal. If the District Engineer determines that the activity complies-Nvith the temu and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, the District Engineer mill notify the permittoe and include any oandidons the District Engineer deems necessary. Any compensatory, mitigation proposal muss be approved by the District Engin= prior to commencing tvor):- If the prospective permitlec is roquired to submil a compensatorymiligation proposal Atith the PCN, the proposal may be tither conceptual or dctailtd. If the prospective elects to submit a compensatorymitigation plan with the PCN, the District Engineer petmittea will expedidDUSly review am proposed compensatwy mitigation plan. The District Engineer . mustre»ew the plan within 45 days ofretxiving a eomplee.PCN anddectrmine whether the conceptual or specific proposed mitigation would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on rime aquatic environment If the net advc= effects of the proja:t on the aquatic environmeni (after corvidm-d6on ofthe compensatory mitigation proposal) ar> determined by Let District N Engtttxr to be minimal, the District Engiaeer Mill provide a timely written response to the o applicant stating thnl the project can prooced under the lams and eondtions of the nationwide pemmiL if the District Engineer determines that the adVase effects of the proposed work are more than o minimal, then he will notify the applicant either: (1) that the: project does mi qualify for autlwriration under the NWP and insuuctthe applicant on the prnccdwes to seed authorizatian under an individual permit; (2) that the project is authorized under theWT subjcctto the applicaru's submission of a mitigation proposal that would reduce the adverse effects on the T aquatic environment io the minimal level; or (3) (hat the project is authorized under ibe NAVP ^' with specific modifications or conditions. Nhero the District Eng'meer determincs that mitigation is required in orderto ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic enviro»en% the activity- will be authorized within l%cAS-day PCN period, includbog the rtexessary conceptual orspecificmitigalion Ora requitem ntthu the applicant submit a miti„ation proposal (has would roluce the advc=effects on the aquatic cntironrncrtt to the minima) Incl. \Vhcn conceptual mitigation is included, or a mitigation plan is required under item (2) above, no work in'vatcrs of the United States 'will occur until the District Enguleu has approved a specific mitigation plan. (c) Agency Coordination: The District Engineer +\ill consider any eoramenis from Federal and State agencies conwmingthc propased activity's compliance"i(h thcicrms and conditions of the NWPs and the need for rrittigation to reduce the projcct's adversecffecis on the aquatic environment 10 a minimal Jcvel. For aciMfics rcqui ingnotif ication to ec District Engirvea that result in the loss of greater than 'f auc of waters ofthe,United States, theDtstrim Enginurw'ill, upon recrapt of anotifcation, provide immcdiaicly(e.g, via faadmile transmis lon, overnigb( mail, or otherexpedilious manner), a copy to the appropriate ofEces of the Fish and Wildlife Sen•iee, Statcnahrral Tesourcc or water quality agency, EP.k Statc Historic Prescrvalion Offiom (SHPO), and, ifappropriale, the National Marine Fisheries Smice. \nth the exception of N\VP 37,thcse agencies will then have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to tcicphonc or fax the District Engiin= notice that they intend to provide substantive, siic specific comments. if so contacted by an agency, the District Engineer will wain an add'ttionaJ 15 calendar da)s beforemaking a dG.ision on thsnotification. lire DistdctEngirreea will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame, but will provide no response to the resource agency, execpt as provid..A Wow. The District Enginecrw'iII indicate in the administrative record assc� date] w�ch each notification that the resource agencies' ooncems-were considered. As rcquircd by Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the District Engincrr will provide a response to National Marine Fsherics Sef ice within 30 days of reodpl of any Essential Fish Habhat cortsavaUon recommendations. Applicants arc encouraged to provide the Corpsmuliiple copies of notifications to apoditc agency notification. (f) Wetlands Delineations: Wetland delinealions must be prepared in aoeordweewith the current method required by IMCorps. For MXT 29 se_- paragraph (b)(9)(i6) for parcels I= than'/A acre in size. The p^arrtiltcc may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic site. There maybe sorry delay if the Corps does the delineation. Furthermore, the 45-day period will no(stsrt until the'wetland delineation has been completed and submitted to the Corps,w•here appropriate. 14. Comnliantx Ccrtiit`AQQ . Even'permittec who bas received a Nationwide permit vetifiration from the Corps will submit a signed certification regarding the completed "roil: and anyrequired midgation. The ccni6cation'vill be forwarded by the Carpswith the authorization letter. The txrtification will include: a.) A statement that the authorized werk -was done in arcordance'vith the Corps authorization, including any gweral or specific condhions; b.) A stalmr-nt that any required mitigation was oompleted car accordance with sic permit conditions and c.) The signature of the permeim ccrtiiying dic c'mplction of the'vvr"n and mitigation. 15_ Us of 1✓mltiole T'atiomvidePctrni(_s. Tic use of morethan one N\VP for a single and complete project is prohibited, except When the acreage loss of waters oftbe United States authorized by the N\VPs deg not exceed the acrcagclitnit of theN\','P with the highest specified acreage limit. For example, if a road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under N\A`P 14, with associated band stabilization authorized byN\VP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of dr. United States for the total project cannot exceed 1133ert 16.y,'aalccs tcr Supply lnt. No activity, including structures end work in na+igablc waters of the United States rr dischoges of dredgod or fill material, may occur in the proximity, of a public tv'4er supply intake ex0epi where the activity is for repair of the public water supply intake structures or adjaoaTt bsnl: stabilization. 17. ShellfisFt Beds. No ac6v'ity, IDcludatg structures and work in nav6gabicuatcrs of the United States or th ale d shellfish populations; runless discharges of dredged cr fill material, may Occur in areas of conart the activity is directlyrclaled to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized byN\VP 4. ] 8. Suitable 1.9aterral. No acti,'ity, including structures and work in nsvigableveatua of theUnited States or discharges of dredged or fill material, may consist of unsuitable material (cg.. trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.) and material used for construction or discharged ni=be free from toxic polluumu in toxic ihrnrthn(s (see Section 30 of The Clean R'scer Act). 19. MitLeniia . The Disttid Erugmrxawill coTtsiticr Ibefactors d'ucussod bclow-Atri detarrrtining the aoaptabilit}' ofapproprratc rod practicable mi(igatirn necessary'la ofisct adverse effxts on the aquatic environment that are Mora than minimal. (a) 'lire project Mu -t be designed and conswctwd to avoid and minimize adverse cfft� to waurs u. the US to The maxbnuru L\Zent practicable at the project site (.c., on site). (b) 1Ittigalion in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectif) Tno, reducing or compaisating) will be regthirod to Ute C)dWLDeOCSSary to ensure that the adverse effcm to the aquatic en'ironmart arc minimal. (c) Compensatory•raidgation at a minimum onc-for-one ratio Hill be required for all'rt-tland impacts rYquirtog a PCN, unless the District Engineer determines in "Tiling thsl some other form of mitigation would be morn covirunmenWly appropriate and provides a project-spccif ic'aaiver of this mquirement. Consistent with National policy, theDistricl Engineer will establish a preferana for rtstoration of wcTlands as compensatoryrnhigation, with preservation used only in exceptional circumstances. (d) Compmsatory mitigation (i_e-, replacement or substitution of aquatic resources for those irnpactPd) will not be used to increase the acreage losses all owed by the aci,ragc limits of some of dteNRTPs. For example,\I/4\•acre of wrllands cannot be. crcated to change a \314t-acn: loss of wetlands to a\12V2cre loss associated with N Ar? 39 verification. Howtiv'er, \l12vacre of created 'vedarids can be used to reduce the impacts of a \1 M-acre loss of'vellands to the minimum impact level in order to meet the minimal impad roquiremcnl associated Agin k��llrPs. (e) To be practicable, the mitigation mast be -available and capable of bzingdonc considering costs existing technology, and logistics in light of the overall project purposes. Examples of mitigation that may, be appropriate and practicable include, but are not limited to: reducing tbe. size of the projocr establishing and maintaining i erland or upland vegetated buffers to protect open wav such as streams; and replacing tosses of aquaticrc ource functions and values by creating restoring, enhancuig, or preserving similar functions and values, preferably in the same watershed. (!) Btc,rs oratory' mitigation plans for projects in or ncx streams or other opus mvcrs will normally include a requircm:nl Forthe rsl.ablishment, maintenance, and legal protection (e.g., casrmrents, deed resltictions) ofvctetated buffers to open "'Biers. In many cases, vegetated buf ms will be the only compensatory mitigation required. Vegetated buffers should consist of native species. The w'idth ofthc vcgrratcd buffers rcqu'irod will address docxtmented water quality or aquatic habitat loss eoncetns-'N'ormally, the vegetated buffer will be 25 10 50 fecl'vids on each side of the stream, but the DistrictEnginears may, require slighty'rider vegetated buffer to address documented caster quality or habitat loss oortcens. v,'hcrc both wetlands and opr..n "waters exist on the project site, the COTS will dctennioe the appropriate oomp:nsatory mitigation (e.g., stream buffers or wetlands compensation) based on whzi is best for the aquatic cnvir0yuncRt on a watershed basis. In cascs where vegetated buffers are; determined to be the mst appropriale form of compensatory mitigation, the District Engineer may waive or reduce the requ iremcm to protide wriland comp-.aisalorymitigalion for w'c(land impacts. ) Compensatomid-anon proposals submitled'vith the "notification"Tnayb either conceptual or (gry detailed_ if conceptu hd plans are approved under the vexification, then the Carps will condition the verification to require detailed plans be submitted and approved by the Corps prior to construction of fire authorized activiry in waters; ofiln US. (h) Permiriees may propose the use of rr iigstion banks, in -lieu fee arrangements or s;garale activit)_specific compensatorymitigation. in all cuts that require compensatory mitigafion, mitigation provisions will specify the party responsible for accomplishing and/or complying wi4 the mitigation plan. 20. Spm rtina Ares. Activities, includingstmctures andusork in navigable waters of thcUnitcd States or discharges of drudged or fill material, in spawning areas daring spanning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g., excavate, fill, or smother downstream by sulimntlal turbidit)) of an important spawning area are not authorized. 21. Manasement of�Vatra Flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the activity must be designed maintain pmoonstruction dowTtstrcam flow conditions (e g., location, capacity.ermthe an ted Furthore, actn'itymust not permaneartly' restrict or impede the passagc anal raesp high flmYs (unless the primarypurposc of the fill is to impound waters) and thestnrctureor discbarge of dredged or ED material must TAthstand expected high flows. lb activity must, to the maximum anent practicable, provide for retaining exms {lows from the site, Provide for In arntsining surface fdolyrates front the sitc5ir➢ft-10 preconstruction conditions, and provide for not inarasing'water flows from the project site, Telouling w'aier, or redirecdrhg water flow beyond preeonstruclion conditions. Strearn channciizingwill be reduced to iheminirml amount nA.,txssary, and the aclivity most, to the maximum ,steel practicable, reduce advttrsc effects such as flooding 01 erosion 22. 23. 24, 25. 26. 27 dottnsvn:am and upstream of the prcjcci site, unless the activity is pan of a larger system designed to manage eater 0ow- In mosl cases, it %till not be a roquircment to conduit detailed studies and monitorir�F of ixj= riot\-. This condition is only applicable to projtxts that have the poicnital to affoa watcrflows. Whilc appropriate mcrsures must be taken, it is notneccssw)• to conduct dowited studies to identifysucb nicaswrsorrequire monitoring In eruurethrirefrcctivencss.Nomtally, the Corps mill defu to strut and local authorities regarding mantgcment of ttatcr flow.. Advcr.,c Effects From Impotmdmetts. If the activity, including stnrctures and wvork in navigable waters of [her United States or discharge of dredged or fill material, creates an impoundment of ttatcr, adverse n3ects on the aquatic system caused by the e xelmledpcssa,-^e of water and/or the mstriction of its flowsball be minimized to the. maximum ex[en( practicable. oVatcrfmtl Breeding Areas. Activities, including strucbrres andwark in navigable caters of the. United Stales or discharges of dredged or fill material, into breeding areas formigarorywdierfowvt musibe avoidtd to (he maximum cxtentpracticable. Removal ofTt�nporary Fill$. Any temporary fills roast be removed in their entirety and the affu.led areas rettrrted to their proexisling elevation. D sivnattd Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource \va[ers indudr, NOAA-designoted marine saoctuar;s,National Estuarine Research Rescrvcs, National Wild and ScewlicAivets, critical habitat for Federally listed threatened and endangered species, coral rr-- , Stale natural heritage sites, and outstand'og national resource waters or other waters officially desigruded by a State as having particWw environmcntrd or ecological significance, and identified by the District Engineer after notice and opportunity for public comment_ The. District Engutcer may also designate additional critical resource waters after notice and opportunity for comment - (a) &xexpt as noted below, discharges of draigcd or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by M%Ts 7, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 29. 31, 35, 391 40, 42, 43, and 44 for any activity vvitbin, ordirecily aflcciine, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters. Dig:barges of dredged or fill materials into wute;s of the United States may br. authorized by the above N'\\ r s in Nniional Wild and Scenic Rivers if the activity complies wide General Condition 7. Further, such discharges may be author zed in design. --led critical habitat for Federally listed threalcncd or endangered species if the activity complies with Central Condition 1 I and the U.S. Fish and 1\51dlife San-icc or theNatienal Marine Fisheries Stavicc has conctured in a detrnnina?ion of compliancctvith this condition. (b) ForN\1Ts 3, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 29, 30, 33, 34, 3fi, 37, and 39, nod Gcation is required in accordance with General Condition 13, for any gate W proposed in the designated citical resource Haters including -wetlands adjacent to those waters_ The District Engineermby autlarizc activities under these NWs only after he dQermines that the impacts io the critical xsouroe wsters will be no more than minimal. Filtc \t ithin 10D-Year Floodnlaios. For purposes of this general condition, 100-year floodplains avid Ix idtrntified thmagb the Federal Emergency N1=agement Agency's (FEW) Flood Insurance Rate %.taps or FEN:A-approved lo.;..] floodplain naps. (a) Dishages in Flwdplain; Below Headwaters. Discharges of drulged or fill material into -gears of the US within foe mapped I00-year floodplairt, belowbeadwatcrs (i.e. bee cfs), resulting in pernnan ant abovL-grade fills, are nor authorized byN%%Ts 39, 40, 42, 43, and 44. (b) (b) Discharges in Floodwzy; AboveHcadwalcrs. Discharges of dredged err fill material into watzrs of the US within the FrMA or locally mappt d floodway, resulting in permanent above• grade fills, arc not authorized byNIWPs 39, 40, 42, and 4-0. (c) The permirtct- must comply with any applicable FaIA-approved stale or local floodplain maI,agemenl requirements. Constnitai,w Period. For activities ihrl have not burn verified by the Corps and theprojezA was aL,rnmenxd oruodu contract to commeneeby tlreexpirabon daleoftheN\VP (or modification or reyocatimn date}, the wvrk must be completed within I2-montfts afb;rr such date (including any modification that aff=ts the project). For acCivitiesthu have been verified and thcprojrU was commenced ortmdu contract to commenoomithErt the verification period, the work must be compleicdby the date dclermined bythe Corps. For projects that have been verified by the Corps, an cxitnsion of a Corps approved completion due maybe requested. This request must be submitted at least onemonth before the previously approved completion dale. Further Information: I. District etu6nt as have authority to determine ifan actitiry complies vvhh the terms xtd conditions of an N',VP. 2. MVPs do nGi obviate the need to obtain other Federal, State, or local permits, approvals, or A authorizations required by late. N 3. N\VPs do not grant any property rights or exrAusiveprivileges. 4. N\VPs do not authorize any injury to the prope-ty or rights of amines. N 5. MVPs do not authorize interfereoce with any existing or proposed Federal project. o a :'T J • t N 0 0 0 m ,p-04-02 02:01pm From- 0 • T-200 P.08/08 F-112 0 U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers Norfolk District CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PERMIT Permit Number: 02-B0082 Name of Permittee: Wrights Run Limited Partnership, Inc. Date of Issuance: September 3, 2002 Permit Type: Nationwide permit 39 Within 30 days of completion of the activity authorized by this permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Norfolk District Northern Virginia Field Office Attn: Mr. Ronald H. Stouffer, Jr. 18139 Triangle Plaza, Suite 213 Dumfries, Virginia 22026 Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to permit suspension, modification or revocation. I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit. Signature of Permittee Date Aug 05 02 02:42p Omir}x Inc. 703,620-2504 p.2 RELEASE OF EASEMENT THIS RELEASE, given this 25th day of April, 2001, by THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY, a Maryland and Virginia Corporation, dba Allegheny Power, whose address is 10345 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 (hereinafter referred to as ("Company") to WRIGHT'S RUN L.P. trading as EASTGATE PROPERTIES, whose address is 2800 Shirlington Road, Suite 803, Arlington, Virginia 22206 (hereinafter referred to as ("Owner"). WITNESSETH TT-IAT WI-IEREAS, by a Right of Way Agreement dated the 17`}' day of November, 1949, Company acquired an easement of right-of-way for electric transmission or distribution line(s) across Owner's property located south of the City of Winchester, in the Opequon Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia, the Right - of -Way being recorded in the land records of Frederick County, Virginia in Book 213 at Page 374, and by a Right -of -Way Agreement dated the 260i day June, 1980, Company acquired and easement or right-of-way for electric transmission or distribution line(s) across Owner's property located south of the City of Winchester, in the Opequon Magisterial District of Frederick County, Virginia in Book 524, at Page 302 (collectively, the easements or rights -of -way granted under November 171h, 1949 Right -of -Way Agreement and the June 26a', 1980 Right -of -Way Agreement are hereinafter referred to as the "Rights -of -Way", and Wi-IEREAS, Company has agreed to release a portion of the Rights -of -Way and terminate the above -referenced Rights -of -Way Agreement as to the released portion of the Rights -of -Way. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the payment of One Dollar ($1.00), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Company hereby releases, remises and quitclaims to Owner a portion of the Rights -of -Way over Owner's land. The released portion of the Rights -of -Way are more particularly shown on Exhibit "A". It is the intention of the parties to terminate the Right -of -Way Agreements only as they affect Owner's above described property. The undersigned Real Estate Manager certifies that this conveyance is not part of a transaction in which there is a sale, lease, exchange or other transfer of all or substantially all of the property and assets of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Company has caused this release to be executed by its Real Estate Manager and attested by its Secretary or one of its Assistant Secretaries the day and year first herein above written. dl ouL C) 16-Ld Out 1XIOL , PGO-/ o. P . 2_-T40 WIn0V � iU ,Un ZZ o l Aug 05 02 02:43p Omi0 Inc. 7031W0-2504 p.3 ATTEST: 4tk) 'k, Jitkt-� Assistant Secretary COMPANY: THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY dba ALLEGHENY POWER By: G.W. Dcvine Real Estate Manager Commonwealth of Pennsylvania } ) To Wit: County of Westmoreland } I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 34day of April, 2001, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, personally appeared G.W. Devine, Real Estate Manager, Allegheny Power, known to me to be the person whose name is signed to the foregoing written instrument and acknowledged before me in my said County that he has been duly authorized to execute the same on behalf of THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY for the purposes therein contained, and that the actual consideration paid is in the sum total of Zero Dollars ($0.00). Witness my hand and notarial seal. My Commission Expires: Notary Public Nol rla Seal Fred Sovya„ t olary Public Greensburg, Wos rore.and County My Commission Expires Jan. 17, 2005 CO co U-1 Aug 05 02 02: 43p Om i t Inc. Allegheny Power rau ti+" t" 1 . I +r A 0 0 mud 40-2 VA646 55-2 VA2033 55-2 �k VA2032 55-2 t.. VA2031 55-2 a VA2030 55-2 VA642 i40-2 2-4 ACSR 50-2� N2740-•_•_ 35-6 --� 15 C N2751 NA V 35--6 MJ mow: rclr�r-s print 19 the prop�� P:leghmy f oxand and oculol be copied without permission from Allegheny. D;31oncos nhoxn may not be accurate \ and arm subject to construction changes. 19 70 703,620-2504 p.4 vx MOM K aura roc = rnaat xxc 1:3472 45-3 41 N3\�2\\2 C� 1_1/0 N76577 35-; N45440 40-4 (� 2 2A 15 C - 35-6 N27396 a� 35� 6 •� VA639 / .'t. 4 0 - 2 / VA6 50-. PUN / V N1799, j 4D-6 CSR N19945 40-6 5C NA V Request For Site Plan Comments Department of Planning and Development Mail to: Hand deliver to: Department of Planning and Development 107 N. Kent Street Attn: County Planner Fourth Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5651 (540) 665-5651 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International, Inc. Address: Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road, NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road. Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County, Virginia Planning and Development's Comments: Date received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Planninu and Development use only Date revision received Date approved Incomplete Date reviewed COI NI'Y of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 September 25, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22601 RE: Review Comments, Home Depot Distribution Center; Site Plan #37-02 Property Identification Number (PIN) 76-A-53 Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: Thank you for the recent submission of the above -referenced site plan. I have completed a review of the plan and would like you to address a few issues in a revision. I have enclosed a red -lined copy of the site plan to clarify the concerns of staff. Please note the comments I have made below. Review Comments Fire Code Improvements: Please provide the location of all improvements necessary to meet the fire code requirements; this includes fire hydrants, required bollards, and fire lanes. 2. Recorded Plat: County records indicate that the subject parcel has not been created. Prior to approval of the lot, a guarantee bond will be required for the completion of Maranto Manor Drive. 3. Road Information: Please provide dimensions, boundaries, width, pavement, and construction of planned and existing roads adjoining the site. Specifically, please provide details regarding the development of Maranto Manor Drive and the intersection of Tasker Road and Maranto Manor Drive. Completion of the entrance from Maranto Manor into the Home Depot facility, as shown on the plan, will be required prior to occupancy of the facility. 4. Adjoining Properties: Please add the Property Identification Number (PIN #), use, and zoning of all adjoining properties to the site plan. There is no reference to the proposed Adelphia Cable facility immediately above the Home Depot site. Conditional Zoning: A listing of conditions placed on the site as a result of rezoning approval should be indicated on the plan. Please note that a traffic impact study is detailed in the proffers for each site development use proposed within the Eastgate Commerce Center at the time of site plan review. It will be necessary to submit this to the Winchester office of VDOT if you have not already done so. Trash Receptacles: Please indicate if there are any outdoor trash receptacles proposed. If so, please show them on the plan and provide details of required screening. FAR: Please provide FAR calculations to include what is required and proposed. 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Home Depot Distribution Center, SP# 37-02 Page 2 September 26, 2002 S. Parking Calculations: Please provide calculations for the number of required parking spaces including handicapped accessible, and loading spaces, indicating the number required and the number proposed. Parking Areas: Please label which areas of the parking lot are for employee parking only, loading spaces, staging areas, or tractor trailer storage/parking. 10. Envirorunental Features: Please indicate the acreage of environmental features and the proposed disturbance areas in acreage and percentages. Please reference all waivers that were granted for additional disturbance of environmental features beyond what the zoning ordinance allows on this property. 11. Landscape Plan: Please provide calculations for the perimeter and interior landscaping required, and the number of trees and shrubs proposed. Evergreen hedges are required around the parking lot perimeter to prevent headlights form shining onto adjoining properties. 12. Easements: The site plan proposes construction of the Home Depot facility partially within the North Virginia Power Company easement. Typically, construction of buildings is not allowed within easements. Please provide documentation that construction of buildings within this easement is permissible by the power company. Also, there is no reference to the tree and stream protection easement that is located on 18.495 acres of the property. 13. Phase II: Prior to construction of Phase II, an approved site plan will be required. Please note this on the plan as approval of this site plan does not cover Phase II. After you have revised the site plan, please resubmit one copy so that I may verify the information contained on the plan. I will then need all approved review agency comment sheets and five copies of the final site plan for approval. Comment sheets are required from the following agencies: Building Inspections Department; Frederick County Engineer (Public Works); Frederick County Fire Marshal; Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT); Frederick County Sanitation Authority; and the Winchester Regional Airport. If you have any questions concerning this review, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Rebecca Ragsdale, Planner I RAR/cih MRt CNUJ-) t D bb, - Goo -we S �I (t"'(�'�'LLCO Enclosure cc:: Industrial Developments International, Inc.; Monarch Tower, Suite 1500; 3424 Peachtree Road, NE; Atlanta, GA 30326 U \Rcbccca�Sitc P1ans\11omcDcpotRcvicw wpd 00 00 Oow6f Site Plan Information Checklist The following information must be included on your site plan. If your site plan is incomplete or is missing information, it will not be reviewed and returned to you for revisions. Administrative Information I, Y N General Site Information Y N 9191 -5i�* vi5i-1 - (OaA IV& 1. Name of proposed development. 2. Name, address, and phone number of owner. 3. Name, address, and phone number of developer. 4. Name, address, and phone number of designer. 5. Certificate of surveyor, engineer, or architect. 6. Date plan prepared and date of revisions. 7. A listing of all conditions placed on the site as a result of a conditional use permit or conditi;7-a�ing apprnv-g 8. A space labeled "Approved by the Zoning Administrator" for the approval signature and date of approval. 9. A description of setbacks or conditions placed on the site as a result of a variance approval. (Reference the variance application number.) Mo P has Ci UAW ........... 10. Location map (scale 1:2000) ..I........ 11. Magisterial District ........... 12. Scale of site plan (not to exceed 1:50) ........... 13. North Arrow 14. Zoning of site ...t .... (15. Use, zoning, and Property Identification Number (PIN#) of all adjoining properties. This includes properties located across right- of-ways, streams, and railroad tracks. ........... 16. Surveyed boundaries for all lots and parcels. M N General Site Lcon tj Y N v/,,,,, ./, ........... 17. Acreage of all lots included in the plan. ........... 18. The location and dimensions of all required setbacks and yard areas. . ........ ........... 19. The location and type of all dwelling units. ......... ........... 20. Location and description of all recreation facilities. ......... ........... 21. Location of sidewalks and pedestrian ways. ,.,,..,.. ........... 22. Location and area of common open space. �/ ........ 23. The location, height, and dimensions of all signs. ,,...... 24. Location, height, and specifications of outdoor lighting fixtures. ......... ........... 25. Location and nature of outdoor storage areas. ........... n Location of outdoor trash receptacles and dimensions of structure (fencing, etc.) required to enclose receptacles. , Building Information Y N V V. ........... 27. The height of all buildings and structures. „Y.... 28. Location of all buildings, structures and uses. �/ ✓ ...,,, .... The proposed use of each building, structure and area. ,,,.., 30. Ground floor area and total floor area of all buildings with FAR calculations for commercial and industrial zoning districts. N w J�5 i T;5/95 '� 6 III-10,00,(, Inc, 1 'Iemplwe) sPat,,o ) , 06�y boo qo 1600 1 w Roads Y N ✓ ......... .......... Utilities Y N ✓ ........ ........... ✓ ......... ........... Parkin Y N LAC 31. Name and number of existing and planned streets on and adjoining the site. 32. Location of existing and planned streets on and adjoining the site. 33. Posted speed limit of existing adjacent roads. 34. Location and dimensions of all proposed entrances from public right-of-ways. 35. Location of all entrances on adjoining roads within 200 feet of the proposed or existing entrance. 36. Dimensions, boundaries, width, pavement, and construction of planned roads. 37. Location of all utilities, including sewer and water lines with the size of lines, mains, and laterals. 38. Location and width of all easements, including access, utility, and drainage easements. 39. Location and nature of fire lanes, fire hydrants, and all other facilities necessary to meet Fire Code requirements. t` 40. Calculations describing the required number of parking and loading spaces. .......... 41. Location and dimensions of all parking and loading spaces, driveways, parking aisles, curbing and other features to be used. .......... 42. Location and dimension of all disabled parking spaces and ramps. M M Natural Features Y N ......... ........... 43. Existing and finished contour lines. ✓..... 44. Location of steep slopes, woodlands, floodplains, wetlands, sinkholes, and other environmental features. ✓ ......... ........... 45. Location of streams and drainage ways. Landscapin Y N ✓........ ........... 46. Landscaping plan describing location and types of plants to be used. ........... 47. Location of required buffers and screening with cross sections or profiles. Erosion and Sediment Control Y N V .... ... .... ... 48. A stormwater management plan with run off calculations and location and description of facilities to be used. 49. Soil erosion and sedimentation control plan describing the location and methods to be used to minimize erosion and sedimentation during development. i 06-20-2002 03:3OPM FROM MARSH&LEGGE LR4D SURUEYOR TO i FOB N 81 4q 19 f � 1p�/o � �ioyr i NOTES. i IFS I 1. NO 777LE ''£PORT FURNISHED. 2. EA SEMEN OTHER THAN SHOWN MAY EX1Si7 L 18 ;j PLAT SHOWING j TREE & STRtAM PROTECTION EA�EMENT ON THE LAND;OF WRIGHT'S RUN L.P. j DEED BOOK 719 PAGE 642 j OPEQUON MAGISTERIL DISTRICT i FRF1'1FL?rL! rni ini�•v vnnuuw 7223520 P.02 UNE BEARING DISTANCE L1 S 52'01'43" E 294.76 L2 S 10'52 02" W 149.38' L N 49*11'20" W 207.13' L4 S 87'01'46 W 204.87' L5 S 45'01'46 W 214.08' L6 S 5352'12"W 85.53' L7S 34'08 31" W 9-9 42 L8 S 42'27 01 W 28.65 9 S 02'21'50 W 257.69 L10 S 68'38 58 65.62' L11 S 5'0111 E 129.65 S 70'05 51 E 76.90 S 40'37 49" E 97.93 L14 S 51'31 41 E 149.33 L15 S 4823'45 E 127.92 L16 S 3857'23 E 88.75' L17 S 31 *12'40 E 117.93 L18 S 75'32'38" E 85.06' L19 S 47'39 21 E 614.74 L20 S 32'53 31 " E 240.79 L21 S 66'50 45 r.E 162.14 L22 N 74'22'34 E 398.63 L23 S 20'42 07 E 21.53 REDb[�f� &170W AQWS ..............:.`o ::..: 2 ..; ::: .................. ??cy3 N/F MONTIE W. GIBSON & PEARL E. GIBSON 400 0 400 800 SCALE: 1 " = 400' Dougglas C. Legge No. 001197 LJ ...-.-.-. ". .,...:. •. .. . ..' :... De arimcnt'oi,I'Isinn:n7; :and�Developmant. ':"r.�:':`�;.-. . .... - 5401665-S651 . FAY: 540/ 678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, Deputy Planning Director RE: Eastgate Commerce Center Woodland Disturbance Waiver DATE: April 20, 2000 Please find attached a letter from C. E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., Vice President of Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates, dated March 13, 2000. On behalf of Eastgate Properties, Mr. Maddox is requesting a woodland disturbance waiver as permitted under Section 165-31 B(7) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance allows for the disturbance of 25% of the total woodland area on a specific parcel or within the total acreage of a master planned area. Gilbert W. Clifford and Associates has prepared an exhibit which identifies the environmental features within Eastgate Commerce Center. Sheet 1 of 2 of this exhibit identifies 38 acres of woodlands throughout the commercial and industrial park. Eastgate Properties is requesting a waiver to allow for the disturbance of up to 55%, or 21 acres, of the total woodland area within Eastgate Commerce Center. Sheet 2 of 2 of this exhibit demonstrates the location of the 17 acres of woodland that would remain undisturbed if this waiver is granted. In order to ensure that additional disturbance will not occur, representatives of the Eastgate Commerce Center have proposed to establish an environmental corridor easement for the remaining 17 acres of woodlands. The environmental corridor easement is identified with a legal survey description which will be incorporated on the master development plan and on all subdivision plats that are established within the Eastgate Commerce Center. This easement preserves the environmental features by restricting any disturbance within the surveyed area. The Planning Commission considered this waiver request during their April 19, 2000 meeting. The Planning Commission recognized the need to support this request to ensure that master planned industrial land was not unreasonably restricted for development purposes; however, it was felt that woodland preservation should occur along the southwestern boundary line to protect the adjoining property owner. The applicant advised the Planning Commission that they would revise the plan and the environmental corridor easement to provide for a 25-foot strip of protected woodland area along the southwestern boundary line. The Planning Commission supported that concept and recommended unanimous approval of this waiver request. U divan\Common\OTHHR\L'astgateConmrcrccCenterWoodlandDisturbanccWatvcr-170SMcmo svpd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 �.;� ... ,......, ..._ ...... r COUNTY of-FREDEgICK :. - Department of Planning and Development P651 v FAX: 540/ 665-6395 A »e 733 MEMORANDUM � O TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors / -� �/ FROM. Eric R . Lawrence, AICP, Deputy Director N_ O Request for Waiver to Increase Steep Slope Disturbance in the Eastgate Commerce V Center `" DATE: April 18, 2002 ....._.:...,...w�.�.�.�:.:.�.�.........:....��-..�.:.�.�..r..:.:::.:.��..,.�..:...,.-.�.-..._ W. Clifford & Attached is a letter and materials from Mr. Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E., t a waiver G. Inc., on behalf of Wright's Run LP. Mr. Maddox requests tsubjectaarea os tlocated in the Associates, I , Ordinance be granted. The disturbance requirement of the Zoning slope southern portion of the Eastgate Commerce Center in the Shawnee ihzoned B2 (Business General), B3 so waiver would apply to the 235.75-acre master plannedproject, Ml (Light Industrial). (Industrial Transition), and ' � Ordinance allows for no more than 25 percent of steep slopes to be disturbed (§ 165-3 1.13). The Zoning larger further statpe areas to be es that the Board of Supervisors may allowfunction of streamlovalleys shall be The Ordinance165-31.B(6)]. In such cases, the fun disturbed in industrial parks [§ preserved through the use of open space, landscaping and stonnwater management facilities. is site is requesting to be permitted to disturb up to 50 percenTl1isliesi e p willes 0 reslultlin the The applicant q in order to more fully develop the property for an industrial use. ranted, a stream preservation easement ance of a proximately 3.32 acres of the 6.65 acres of steep slopes within the Eastgate Commerce disturb p Center. Mr. Maddox has stated that if the steep slope waiver is g ' ed along the property's southern boundary in an effort to preserve the function of the will be establish g stream valley. ance the Commerce In 2000, the Board of Supervisors granted an increase in woodlands lat�ime,lthe planiwas modified to Center, enabling 55 percent of the woodlands to be disturbe • the to ert 's southern boundaries. establish a protection easement for the slope wa xisting woodver lands ted,alongthis woodlands disturbance would be Mr. Maddox has stated that if the steep p reduced to 53.6 percent. ment of a buffer along the southern and western perimeter The applicant has provided for the establish all while maintaining a buffer against o f the tract, essentially the stream valley natural landscape p 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 = r - A C�U�1T�1 of FREI)Ri � IDepart3nent of Planning and Development 540/ 665-5651 r,AX- 540/665-6395 it OI Post -it' Fax Note 7671 Date O7 2 � �pagesToFromApril 26, 2002 Pu� L �cn lirolrr�-<�avoA Co./Dept. co. Phone It Phone tl 66S�S65/ Fax A IFax It &Assoc., Inc. �„�� Attn: Charles Maddox /ur S /r Gilbert W. Co�r�li,,�Je c,.�,%"ec.n/ 117 E. Piccadilly Street, Suite 200 Winchester, VA 22601 RE: STEEP SLOPE DIS TURBANCE WAVER AT EASTGATE COMMERCE CENTER Dear Chuck: e disturbance requirement of e our request for a waiver of the steep slope at their meeting on April This letter is to confirm that rdinance was approved by the Board of Sup Frederick County Zoning portion of the Eastgate Commerce Center in the is steep slope waiver would apply to the 235.75-acre master planned 22, 2002. The subject arearict located ed ip slope southern P d M1 (Light Industrial). Shawnee Magisterial Dist Industrial Transition), an project, zoned B2 (Business General), B3 ( e uired to ensure that subsequent site 1) A survey description for the "preservation area" is required development plans do not encroach into this area. regarding the approval of this waiver, please feel free to call this office. If you �iave any questions reg g >ince rely, I Eric R. La wrence, AICP Deputy Director ERL/ch Harrington Smith, Jr., Shawnee District Supervisor W. Harr cc: Shawnee District Planning Commissioner Robert A. Morris, Commissioner William C. Rosenberry, Shawnee District Planning Jane Anderson, Real Estate Ctr.wpd 0 Wgcndas\Approval ltn\\VAIVER EKEN'P�L•asiyale Comm""' ellester, Virginia 22001-5"o 107 North Kent Street • Win • • • ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AREA IN ACRES TOTAL DISTURBED x DISTURBED FLOODPLAINS 0.5 I 0.0 I 0.0 LAKES do PONDS 0.5 0.0 0.0 NATURAL RETENT10N AREAS 0.0 0.0 0.0 STEEP SLOPES(+15%) 32.0 6.4 20.0 WOODLANDS 38.0 21.0 55.2 WETLANDS 1.5 0.0 0.0 LEGEND STEEP SLOPES (15%+) EXISTING WOODLANDS EXISTING WOODLANDS STEEP SLOPES (15%+) ctf i W e s Z W U a.. W U Z U ZO 0_ W mOf F-O O C/' U Z in F- LLJ Z (n QX Q 0a CAD o Q C W sxn 1-.40q CRAM vr. tyo m m w Y12kjm2 m DAm ]h9/00 • Ert ff • • COMMONWEALTH ®f VIRC-jINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 September 24, 2002 Mr. Paul Ehrenberg C/O Triad Engineering P. O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22604 Ref: Access - Route 800 (Rainville Road), Frederick County Dear Mr. Ehrenberg: JERRYA. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is interested in finalizing comments in reference to the location of Home Depot within Eastgate Commerce Center. Additional information is forthcoming which will assist in the finalization of the comments. VDOT will comment on the following: 1. Current Route 800 (Rainville Road) is adequate for a construction entry. 2. VDOT can support the use of Route 800 as a construction entry provided the following is agreed to: a. Prior to opening of Home Depot, an approved roadway system must be installed according to VDOT specifications. b. The roadway system could be either the existing Route 800 or the proposed Route 522 intersection. c. If Route 800 is identified as the main access, an examination will be required to identify the suitability of the roadway for the proposed traffic. Also, any proffers specific to the rezoning of the Eastgate Commerce Center may be activated and completed as required. In addition, it is recognized there may be other items required in reference to traffic impact. d. If the connection to Route 522 is approved, all construction must be completed prior to opening. e. There will not be any agreements to abandonments, discontinuance of maintenance, etc. on Route 800 until a final design is agreed upon. Should you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, a o m e o an Transportation Assistant esident Engineer HFC/rf xc: Mr. Dave Heironimus, Mr. Bill Stover, Mr. Sam Clem, Mr. Eric Lawrence, Mr. Allan Hudson VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING 0 • RECEIVE® SEP 2 5 2002 DEP , OF PLANNINGIDEVELOPMENT • 0 I COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 MEMORANDUM FAX: 540/665-6395 TO: Finance Department FROM: Renee' S. Arlotta, Administrative Assistant 6� RE: Refund - Overpayment on Site Plan Application - Home Depot Import Distribution Center DATE: September 13, 2002 Please issue a check in the amount of $7.20 payable to Triad Engineering, Inc. This amount represents an overpayment of the fee paid by Triad Engineering, Inc. for a non-residential site plan for the Home Depot Import Distribution Center. The correct amount for this site plan fee is $3,805.80. The amount that was actually paid was $3,813.00, which is an overpayment of $7.20. We have attached a copy of Receipt #2798 written on September 5, 2002. This amount was deposited with the Treasurer on September 6, 2002 under the Treasurer's Code ZASP and Finance Code GFG1303-07. We have also attached a copy of the Treasurer's Ticket #00010290001, dated September 6, 2002. Please mail the check to: Triad Engineering, Inc. Attn: Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, VA 22601 Please indicate on the check that the amount represents an overpayment of fees paid for the Home Depot Import Distribution Center Site Plan Application. Thank you! RSA Attachments cc: Jeremy F Camp, Planner II FILE: C:\MyFiles\Corresl)oi►deuce\refuud_clicck_rcqucst.Nvl)d 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 • TRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. 1 YR + BB&T P.O. BOX 2397 PH. 540-667-9300 MORGANTOWN, WV 26505 36154 WINCHESTER, VA 22604 69-339/515 DATE Sep 3, 2002 PAY Three Thousand Eight Hundred Thirteen and 0/100 Dollars AMOUNT *****$3,813.00- TO THE ORDER FREDERICK COUNTY TREASURER OF:'dZ Az � 'v -7 /1 1 AUTHORIZED S GNATURE n SECURITY FEATURES INCLUDED. DETAILS ON BAMG c :��--�..• v^_ �'t'•'^c'r_•�"�=+ "�-: ;�.=^- =: 003EI5411' 1:05L5033940:52?1G8300811' i -') T A X R E C E I P T FREDERICI< COUNTY Ticket #:00010290001 C. WILLIAIvi ORNDOFF, JR Date Register: 9/06/2002 LMvI/LM P.O. BOX 225 Trans. #: 09060 WINCHESTER VA 22604-0225 A�Pti## ZASP ZONING AND SUBDIVISION PERMITS Previous Balance $ 3813.00 Principal Being Paid $ 3813.00 Penalty $ .00 Interest $ .00 Amount Paid $ 3813.00 'Balance Due $ .00 Pd by PLANNING Cash 16.80 Check 91651.52 # VARIOUS BALANCE DUE INCLUDES PENALTY/INTEREST THRU THE MONTH 9/2002 IL O Received From w z W 5i o Address — <qma WWN`>� 0W-0¢6 \` n L t-U For D O ! W O (7 Z :c � L)Z X Z _ 3 U ZZ - ANTT. OF J w a. ACCOUNT W AMT. PAID Q u. r�aua` rJaie 15102- 002798 e 41 1_ . -1. r� 7 r1( ORDER all IRMA dl �O � • 4� ♦ 1, ' 0 i SITE PLAN APPLICATION Department of Planning and Development Use only. Date application received Complete. Date of acceptance _ Incomplete. Date of return. Application # 1. Project Title: Home Depot Import DirtributionCenter 2. Location of Property: Rainville Road Eastgate Industrial Park Frederick County Virginia 3. Property Owner: Eastgate Properties 2800 Shirlington Road Suite 803 Address: Arlington VA 22206 Attn.: Mr. Allan Hudson Telephone: 703 820 2500 4. Applicant/Agent: Industrial Developments International, Inc. Address: Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta GA 30326 Telephone: 5. Designer: Address: Telephone: Contact: s E P X 5 ZOOZ ,_r'i.OFPLANNING'nFVELOPi.,, FX7 0 0 SITE PLAN APPLICATION Department of Planning and Development Use only. q -S-0 p 3 Date application received Application #7—� L,-Complete. Date of acceptance Incomplete. Date of return. 1. Project Title: Home Depot Import DirtributionCenter 2. Location of Property: Rainville Road Eastgate Industrial Park Frederick County Virginia 3. Property Owner: Eastgate Properties 2800 Shirlington Road Suite 803 Address: Arlington VA 22206 Attn.: Mr. Allan Hudson Telephone: 703 820 2500 4. Applicant/Agent: Industrial Developments International, Inc. Address: Monarch Tower, Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta GA 30326 Telephone: 404 479 4060 5. Designer: Triad Engineering,Inc Address: P O Box 2397 Winchester. VA 22601 Telephone: (540) 667-9300 Contact: Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg PE ,riL(;EIVE- S E P X 5 2002 i.OFPLANNING'DF ELO-'.' 6 6a. Is this a standard or 'minor' site plan? 6b. Is this an original or revised site plan? 7a. Total acreage of parcel to be developed Total acreage of parcel: 8. Property Information: a) Property Identification Number: b) Current Zoning: c) Present Use: d) Proposed Use: e) Adjoining Property Use(s): Q Adjoining Property Identification Number(s): A-1613• 87-(4)-11; 87-(4)-10: 87-(4)-9; 87-A-1 g) Magisterial District(s): 0 Standard ✓ Minor _ Original ✓ Revised 81.86 81.86 Tax Map # 76-A-53 M-1 Vacant Warehousing/Distribution Residential Agricultural, Commercial 76-A-53F' 76-A-53; 87-A-350 87-A-31/32; 87- Shawnee I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Planning Department. I also understand that all required material will be complete prior to the submission of my site plan. Signature: Date: 3 '.Z UU SITE PLAN CHECKLIST The checklist below indicates all the information that needs to be submitted as part of the site plan application. All required information must be submitted prior to the final approval of any site plan. The Department of Planning and Development will review the application to ensure that it is complete. If any portion is not included or complete, the site plan application will not be accepted and returned to the applicant(s). Site Plan Package 1. One set of approved comment sheets are required from the following review agencies prior to final site plan approval. It is recommended that applicants contact the Department of Planning and Development to determine which review agencies are relevant to their site plan application. irginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Frederick County Sanitation Authority (V epartment of Planning and Development Inspections Department rederick County Engineer (Public Works) Frederick County Fire Marshal Department of Parks and Recreation �2. One copy of the Site Plan application 3. Five Copies of the Final Site Plan for approval 4. One reproducible copy of the Site Plan (if required) 5. A 35mm slide of the Site Plan (if required) County Health Department City of Winchester Town of Stephens City Town of Middletown Airport Authority Soil & Water Conservation District Request for Street Name TRIAD ENGINEERING, 14 Post Office Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 (540) 667-9300 FAX (540) 667-2260 TO v Ar��d- � ��rl rC/1'M LETTAO'F TRANSMITTAL W , ` DATE G,2 JOB NO.� 09-S ATTENTION: RE: ,( � WE ARE SENDING YOUY Attached _ Under separate cover via !, 2 0Ff'1 WORW— b"") jms: _ Shop Drawings Prints Z5-rA _ Plans _ Samples _ Specificatio Copy of letter _ Change order i� Other Z ,Or4.��1,• pi {you//� COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: For approval For your use As requested X_For review and comment —FORBIDS DUE REMARKS. Approved as submitted Approved as noted Returned for corrections Other _ Resubmit Copies for approval Submit Copies for distribution _ Return Corrected prints 20 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO Signed: PEhlVetrerJ___P.E�"'' r�tiCl H. �h, . / Request For Site Plan Comments Department of Planning and Development Mail to: Hand deliver to: Department of Planning and Development 107 N. Kent Street Attn: County Planner Fourth Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5651 (540) 665-5651 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Mr. Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: Eastgate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road. Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia Planning and Development's Comments: Date received Incomplete Date reviewed Signature and Date Signature and Date (revision) Planning and Development use only Date revision received Date approved Incomplete Date reviewed COMMONWEALTH of VIRCjINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY Philip A. Shucet 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE JERRYA. COPP COMMISSIONER EDINBURG, VA 22824 RESIDENT ENGINEER June 10 2002 TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 Mr. Vernon E. Torney, AICP C/O VETTRA Company 11535 Gunner Court Woodbridge, VA 22192 Ref: Home Depot Import Distribution Center Route 861 Frederick County Dear Mr. Torney: We have reviewed the proposed parameters for the Traffic Impact Analysis as outlined in your correspondence dated May 23, 2002. We have selected certain parameters as stated and commented accordingly: "Site access scenario:" The one [1] site access point (both phases), as we understand the situation, is subject to local approving authority. We further understand a second access may be limited to emergency vehicles. However should a second access be for the accommodation of distribution facility traffic, VDOT reserves to review accordingly. "Utilize applicant -provided traffic distributions for site -- to be provided by client ---site daily truck trips and routing information required by VDOT." Also "Utilize latest 6th Edition ITE peak hour of generator Daily and AM/PM peak hour trip rates (if ITE trip rates used)" We have also reviewed truck and employee volumes as provided by Home Depot indicating a 100% build out volume of 345 tractor trailer trucks and 670 employee vehicles, if all employees drive their own vehicle, and represents a 1015 daily traffic volume with approximately 34% TT Trucks. When compared to the referenced ITE Trip Generation Manual, code 150, we would anticipate 5000 vehicles per day [50% entering and 50% exiting] Accordingly we would anticipate an AM peak hour volume of 579 vehicles [59% enter, 41% exit] and a PM peak hour volume of 615 vehicles [8% enter, 92% exit]. This is not a very favorable comparison. Therefore, we favor the use of the ITE Trip Generation manual, 6th edition, volumes in lieu of the owner provided volumes ---- unless we can obtain addition support documentation, such as: actual traffic counts correlated to square footage of distribution center, etc. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Mr. Vernon E. Torney Ref: Home Depot Import Distribution Center June 10, 2002 Paae #2 "Maintain acceptable LOS=D level of service for intersections and all approaches." We will accept a level of service "C" or higher for intersections and all approaches. NOT D. Future VPD volumes are to be provided on adjacent external roadways by 5% growth rate, not by factoring 10% to peak hour volumes as indicated in parameters. Peak hour factor, as required to complete intersection analysis, is to be as determined from field data, not a system default. We are also sending you "Phase Vehicle Basic Timing Data" for the following signalized Intersections for use in preparing the impact analysis: 11/6037/Crown Cork, Stephenson 11/661, Stephenson I-81 NBL Ramp/Route 11, Stephenson 11/Park Center Drive. Stephenson and MARC Coordination Data named {34} I-81/11 System, Stephenson. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Steven A. Melnikoff Transportation Engineer SAM/rf Enclosures xc: Mr. Paul Ehrenberg Mr. Sam Clem Mr. avp-Hairo _ - us Mr. Jeremy Camp JUN ;? /OOi' Z COUNTY of l' RED RICK 4�. Department of Public Works wl 540/ 665-5643 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 177A October 10, 2002 Mr. Paul H. Ehrenberg, P.E. Triad Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 2397 Winchester, Virginia 22604 RE: Site Plan Comments - Home Depot Distribution Center Frederick County, Virginia Dear Paul: Upon review of the subject site plan, we offer the following comments: 1) Submit a copy of the geotechnical engineer's report for our file. Provide copies of all wetlands permits as well. 2) Indicate when the main stormwater pond's earth retaining wall will be constructed. Because of the size and complexity of the project, it is imperative that the earthwork contractor not deviate From the approved erosion and sediment (E & S) control plan during installation of the E & S control measures. In addition to the size of the project, its proximity to Wrights Run will require the engineer of record to provide Frederick County daily reports which indicate both the E & S control measures installation process and maintenance of same throughout the project. Frederick County will inspect the site at least once a week to review the daily reports and verify compliance with the approved plans. If, and when noted, any and all deficiencies shall be corrected immediately. 3) It will be necessary to schedule a preconstruction meeting at the time of application for the land disturbance permit; this meeting shall include a field inspection. The following people shall be in attendance at this meeting: the owners, earthwork contractor, personnel fi-onTriad Engineering, Inc. including the field inspector, and Frederick County Public Works' staff. 4) Ensure that the backwater condition for the post -developed 100-year storm flows from the stormwater pond does not impact adjacent properties. If it is determined that water ponds on these adjacent properties during storm events it will be 107 North Kent Street - Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 dome Depot Distribution Center Comments Page 2 October 10, 2002 necessary to obtain drainage easements fi-om these property owners. Copies of any and all easements shall be submitted at the time of application for the land disturbance permit. 5) Provide velocities for the storm sewer system. Ensure that all drainage channels are adequately protected. If velocities exceed four (4) foot per second within any of the ditches or channels, it will be necessary to install additional protection. Outlet protection will be required at both temporary sediment basins. 6) Provide a drainage map that corresponds with the hydrographs. 7) Provide copies of all retaining wall designs for our records. Once these comments have been addressed, submit two (2) copies of the site plan for further review. Sincerely, Joe C. Wilder Civil Engineer JCW/rls cc: Frederick County Planning and Zoning t- file C:\Corcl\1N'ordPerfect tlIoII&AhomVile I)otCom.%%-p(I COMMONWEALTH ®f VIlf GINIIA Philip A. Shucet COMMISSIONER Mr. Vernon E. Torney, AICP C/O VETTRA Company 11535 Gunner Court Woodbridoe; VA 22192 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EDINBURG RESIDENCY 14031 OLD VALLEY PIKE EDINBURG, VA 22824 September 12, 2002 Ref: Home Depot Distribution Center / Routes 800 & 522 / Frederick County Dear Mr. Torney: JERRY A. COPP RESIDENT ENGINEER TEL (540) 984-5600 FAX (540) 984-5607 VDOT is in agreement with your overall scope of work as described in your letter dated August 21, 2002. However, we would like to add the following comments: Very little, if any, of the traffic to be generated by this facility is currently included in the existing adjacent street traffic. Therefore, Sixth Edition ITE AM and PM Peak Hour Generator will be used. Source, location and size of facility used to determine trip rates of client supplied trip data is necessary for client supplied trip data to be deemed acceptable. If not acceptable, will use ITE Code as indicated in parameter correspondence [08/21/02) 2. The high tractor trailer volume shall be considered in this analysis. Additional storage lanes lengths will be required to accommodate the high volume trailer traffic. 3. We remain of the opinion as expressed in our correspondence dated June 6, 2002. Applicant traffic volumes when compared to the ITE Trip Generation Manual Code 150 volumes is not very favorable. Therefore, we favor the use of the ITE Trip Generation ivianuai Sixin Edition generated voiumes in iieu of the appiicant provided based volumes. Should you need further clarification, please feel free to contact Mr. Barry Sweitzer at (540) 984-5631. SAM/rf xc: Mr. Sam Clem Mr. Dave Heironimus Mr. Eric Lawrence Sincerely, Steven A. Melnikoff Transportation Engineer VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING SEP 1 ; 2W DEPT yr Request For Site Plan Comments I\ Frederick County Inspections Department Mail to: Hand deliver to: Frederick County Inspections Department 107 N. Kent Street Attn: Building Official Fourth Floor 107 North Kent Street Winchester, VA Winchester, VA 22601 (540) 665-5650 (540) 665-5650 Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please attach one (1) copy of the site plan with this sheet. Applicant's Name: Industrial Developments International Inc.. Address: Monarch Tower Suite 1500 3424 Peachtree Road NE Atlanta, GA 30326 Attn.: Sean O'Brien Phone Number: (404) 479-4060 Name of development and/or description of the request: East_aate Industrial Development — Site Plan for 1,008,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Distribution Center — to be constructed in two (2) phases Location of property: Southerly Terminus of Rainville Road. Within Eastgate Industrial Park. Shawnee Magisterial District Frederick County Virginia Inspections Department Comments: ( b Mmelj�s M!, �v Inspections Dept. use only Date received Date revision received _ Date approved Incomplete Incomplete Date reviewed Date revie v c Signature and Dale Signature and Date (revision) .ffi r. . ,��:vi w..r..il��;r .�...___- • ��Ir ' �I � 1 i 5-, ,1, 1 j BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT INDUSTRIAL ACCESS ROAD -BONDED PROJECT EASTGATE INDUSTRIAL PART{ WHEREAS, Wright's Run L.P. has acquired property known as the Eastgate Industrial Park, located in the County of Frederick, for the purpose of industrial development; and WHEREAS, this property is expected to be the site of new private capital investment in land, building, and manufacturing equipment which will provide employment and increased investment; and WHEREAS, the subject property has no access to a public street or highway and will require construction of a new roadway to connect with Rainville Road (not presently in state highway system) and then to Tasker Road (State Route 642); and WHEREAS, the County of Frederick hereby guarantees that the necessary right-of-way for this new roadway and utility relocations or adjustments, if necessary, will be provided at no cost to the Virginia Department of Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Board of Supervisors for the County of Frederick, Virginia does hereby request that the Commonwealth Transportation Board provide Industrial Access Road funding to provide an adequate road to this property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors hereby agrees to provide a surety or other bond, acceptable to and payable to the Virginia Department of Transportation, in the full amount of the cost of the road; this surety shall be exercised by the Department of Transportation in the event that sufficient qualifying capital investment does not occur on parcel 87- 5-17 or the remaining undeveloped lots between parcel 87-5-17 and existing Rainville Road in the Eastgate Industrial Park within five years of the Commonwealth Transportation Board's allocati of fiends pursuant to this request; and on BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution of Support is contitlgerit upon Wright's Run L.P. to provide to the County of Frederick satisfactory surety in sufficient amount to cover the constriction of the roadway, dedication of required right-of-way for the road's construction; and the movement of any utilities required to construct the road; and .001,111 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby agrees that the new roadway so constructed will be added to, and become part of, the road system of the County of Frederick Secondary System of Highways. PASSED this 10"' day of May, 2000. Upon motion made by W. Harrington Smith, Jr., and seconded by Sidney A. Reyes, the above resolution was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Robert M. Sager Abstained Charles W. Orndorff, Sr. Aye Margaret B. Douglas Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. Aye Sidney A. Reyes Aye A COPY TESTS: Jo . Riley, r Clerk Board of Supervisors County of Frederick, Virginia RESOLUTION NO.: 044-00 cc: Kris Tierney, Planning and Development Director Cheryl B. Shiffler, Finance Director C. William Orndoff, Jr., Treasurer FOR EX/SING WOODLANDS ON THE LAND OF I�