HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201800077 Review Comments WPO VSMP 2019-05-23COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Project title:
Project file number:
Plan preparer:
Owner or rep.:
Plan received date:
Rev. 1 received:
Rev. 2 received:
Rev. 3 received:
Date of comments:
Rev. 1 comments:
Rev. 2 comments:
Rev. 3 comments:
Reviewers:
VSMP Permit plan review
Old Trail Village Block 32 VSMP
WP0201800077
Roudabush,Gale And Assoc. Ufox@roudabush.com]
March Mountain [dave@oldtrailvillage.com]
22 Oct 2018
22 Feb 2019
15 April 2019
22 May 2019
19 Nov 2018
01 April 2019
17 May 2019
23 May 2019
Emily Cox
County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to
act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is approved.
A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
The SWPPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-405. A SWPPP must
contain (1) a PPP, (2) an ESCP, (3) a SWMP, and (4) any TMDL measures necessary.
1. Provide an updated, signed registration statement for Old Trail that includes the disturbance from
this proposed development. Rev. 1: Please provide a map showing the overall coverage on the
current DEQ registration statement. (what the 136.08 acres encompasses). Rev. 2: Comment
not addressed. Rev. 3: Comment addressed.
2. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master SWPPP for Old Trail. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP)
The PPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-404.
Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master PPP for Old Trail. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a
SWMP. This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The
stormwater management plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-403.
1. [cover sheet] List title of plan/exhibit and date of approval for critical slopes
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
analysis/determination. (8-30-18, Critical Slope Exhibit Old Trail Village Block 32) Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
2. [cover sheet] List title of and date of approval of floodplain development permit. (11-6-18,
FDP201800018) Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [cover sheet] Update the plan number to be WP0201800077. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
4. Sheets 5 & 6 should provide a narrative stating the difference between the master plan and this
proposed/actual plan. Differing drainage areas were shown, however, must show overall
compliance with the master plan such as allowable flows and removal rates, etc. Approved plan
information was provided, however actual, proposed information showing compliance is not clear.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
5. Provide routings for stormwater facilities. (not on the plans, separate calculation booklet is fine).
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
6. What are the proposed WSE's of the S-1 facility? Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
7. Location of the existing emergency spillway for the extended detention is unclear. Please clearly
show the location and dimensions. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
8. For the extended detention, Per 3.07-24 of the VA SWM HB, show the proposed buffer zone.
Rev. 1: Buffer appears to conflict with lot 92. Also the lot line for Lot 92 appears to
encroach into the SWM facility. The SWM facility easement must extend around the buffer.
Please show this on the lot. Also show the proposed building location to ensure it does not
encroach into the SWM facility easement. Rev. 2: Buffer is sufficient, however, fence shown
is not in an easement and can be removed by the homeowners? Rev. 3: Comment addressed.
9. For the bioretention, show surface area sizing Per Table 3.11-4 of VA SWM HB. Rev. 1: Per
your response to comment 14, design should not be shown based on the SWM HB. It should
be shown to comply with IIB design. https : / /www. swbmp . vwrrc . vt . edu/wp—
content/uploads/2017/11/BMP—Spec—No-9 BIORETENTION v1-
9 03012011.pdf Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
10. Provide pipe calculations and DA for all pipes associated with SWM (outfall, etc). Other pipes
will be shown in the site plan or road plan, correct? Rev. 1: 5B to 6B shows a velocity over 15
ft/s. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
11. Provide planting/landscape plan for proposed extended detention/biofilter area. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
12. Ensure the proposed disturbance to the stream buffer complies with the areas approved in the
ZMA. Table 9 of the master plan, Conceptual Buffer Encroachment, does not show any for S-1 or
S-13. Sheet 3 of the ZMA, SWM and stream conservation plan, does not appear to show any
disturbance either. However, section 4.2.2.9 does discuss buffer encroachment in the S-13
discussion. Rev. 1: If buffer mitigation is to comply with the master plan, simply reference
the master plan WPO # and remove the applicable sheets. However, if that is the case, this
plan cannot be approved until that master plan is approved. Rev. 2: So, just to clarify, 7,647
will be bonded with this plan? Rev. 3: Comment addressed. Per email dated 4/29/19 from
Ammy George, 40,537 will be bonded with this block.
13. Provide the construction record drawing requirements on the plan.
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/Community Development/for
ms/En ing eering_and_WPO_Forms/WPO_VSMP_ Construction_ Record _Drawin Drawings
v2014.pdf Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
14. It was hard to read the text, but on Sheet 09, was 90% efficiency used for bioretention? Table 5-14
in the VA SWM HB does not show a 90% option. Please clarify. Rev. 1: In order to get the 90%
removal, you must meet all of the design requirements in the IIB guidelines. This includes
pre-treatment. https : //www. swbmp . vwrrc . vt . edu/wp—
content/uploads/2017/11/BMP—Spec—No-9 BIORETENTION v1—
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
9 03012011 . pdf Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
15. Rev. 2: Please provide the latest water quality tracker spreadsheet. Rev. 3: Comment
addressed.
D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESOP)
Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP.
This plan is approved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The erosion control
plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-402.
1. Clarify the legend. There are two different floodplain hatches with the same label (floodplain AE). Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
2. Provide outlet protection for all pipes (into biofilter, extended detention and S-1 basin). Show outlet
protection sizing calculation. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [Sheet 7] Sequence of construction should be more site specific. Should reference the difference
between phases and conversion of controls from existing conditions (Phase 1) to Phase 2 as well as
conversion to stormwater facilities. Rev. 1: The sequence on sheet 7 should reflect the sequence
shown on sheet 2. Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
The VSMP permit application and all plans may be resubmitted for approval when all comments have
been satisfactorily addressed. For re -submittals please provide 2 copies of the complete permit package
with a completed application form.
Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to
discuss this review.
Process;
After approval, plans will need to be bonded. The bonding process is begun by submitting a bond estimate
request form and fee to the Department of Community Development. One of the plan reviewers will
prepare estimates and check parcel and easement information based on the approved plans. The County's
Management Analyst will prepare bond agreement forms, which will need to be completed by the owner
and submitted along with cash, certificates or sureties for the amounts specified. The agreements will need
to be approved and signed by the County Attorney and County Engineer. This may take 2-4 weeks to
obtain all the correct signatures and forms.
Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance agreements will also need to be completed and recorded.
The County's Management Analyst or other staff will prepare the forms and check for ownership and
signature information. The completed forms will need to be submitted along with court recording fees.
After bonding and agreements are complete, county staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ
database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local
VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid
directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the
application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the
application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county.
After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre -construction conference.
Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre -construction conference form, and pay the remainder
of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre -construction
conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre -construction conference, should
everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that
work may begin.
County forms can be found on the county website forms center under engineering;
hqp://www.albemarle.org/deptforms.asp?department--cdengno
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
VSMP Permit plan review
Project title: Old Trail Village Block 32 VSMP
Project file number: WP0201800077
Plan preparer:
Roudabush,Gale And Assoc. Ufox@roudabush.com]
Owner or rep.:
March Mountain [dave@oldtrailvillage.com]
Plan received date:
22 Oct 2018
Rev. 1 received:
22 Feb 2019
Rev. 2 received:
15 April 2019
Date of comments:
19 Nov 2018
Rev. 1 comments:
01 April 2019
Rev. 2 comments:
17 May 2019
Reviewers:
Emily Cox
County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to
act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is denied. The
rationale is given in the comments below. The application may be resubmitted for approval if all
the items below are satisfactorily addressed. The VSMP application content requirements can be
found in County Code section 17-401.
A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
The SWPPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-405. A SWPPP must
contain (1) a PPP, (2) an ESCP, (3) a SWMP, and (4) any TMDL measures necessary.
1. Provide an updated, signed registration statement for Old Trail that includes the disturbance from
this proposed development. Rev. 1: Please provide a map showing the overall coverage on the
current DEQ registration statement. (what the 136.08 acres encompasses). Rev. 2: Comment
not addressed.
2. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master SWPPP for Old Trail. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP)
The PPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-404.
1. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master PPP for Old Trail. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a
SWMP. This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The
stormwater management plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-403.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
1. [cover sheet] List title of plan/exhibit and date of approval for critical slopes
analysis/determination. (8-30-18, Critical Slope Exhibit Old Trail Village Block 32) Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
2. [cover sheet] List title of and date of approval of floodplain development permit. (11-6-18,
FDP201800018) Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [cover sheet] Update the plan number to be WP0201800077. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
4. Sheets 5 & 6 should provide a narrative stating the difference between the master plan and this
proposed/actual plan. Differing drainage areas were shown, however, must show overall
compliance with the master plan such as allowable flows and removal rates, etc. Approved plan
information was provided, however actual, proposed information showing compliance is not clear.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
5. Provide routings for stormwater facilities. (not on the plans, separate calculation booklet is fine).
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
6. What are the proposed WSE's of the S-1 facility? Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
7. Location of the existing emergency spillway for the extended detention is unclear. Please clearly
show the location and dimensions. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
8. For the extended detention, Per 3.07-24 of the VA SWM HB, show the proposed buffer zone.
Rev. 1: Buffer appears to conflict with lot 92. Also the lot line for Lot 92 appears to
encroach into the SWM facility. The SWM facility easement must extend around the buffer.
Please show this on the lot. Also show the proposed buil _ ; location to ensure Foes not
encroach into the SWM facility easement. Rev. 2: Buffer is sufficient, however, fence shown
is not in an easement and can be removed by the homeowners?
9. For the bioretention, show surface area sizing Per Table 3.11-4 of VA SWM HB. Rev. 1: Per
your response to comment 14, design should not be shown based on the SWM HB. It should
be shown to comply with IIB design. https : / /www. swbmp . vwrrc . vt . edu/wp—
content/uploads/2017/11/BMP—Spec—No-9 BIORETENTION v1-
9 03012011.pdf Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
10. Provide pipe calculations and DA for all pipes associated with SWM (outfall, etc). Other pipes
will be shown in the site plan or road plan, correct? Rev. 1: 5B to 6B shows a velocity over 15
ft/s. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
11. Provide planting/landscape plan for proposed extended detention/biofilter area. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
12. Ensure the proposed disturbance to the stream buffer complies with the areas approved in the
ZMA. Table 9 of the master plan, Conceptual Buffer Encroachment, does not show any for S-I or
S-13. Sheet 3 of the ZMA, SWM and stream conservation plan, does not appear to show any
disturbance either. However, section 4.2.2.9 does discuss buffer encroachment in the S-13
discussion. Rev. 1: If buffer mitigation is to comply with the master plan, simply reference
the master plan WPO # and remove the applicable sheets. However, if that is the case, this
plan cannot be approved until that master plan is approved. Rev. 2: So, just to clarify, 7,647
will be bonded with this plan?
13. Provide the construction record drawing requirements on the plan.
hllp://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/Community Development/for
ms/En ing eering_and_WPO_Forms/WPO_VSMP_ Construction_ Record _Drawin Drawings
v2014.pdf Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
14. It was hard to read the text, but on Sheet 09, was 90% efficiency used for bioretention? Table 5-14
in the VA SWM HB does not show a 90% option. Please clarify. Rev. 1: In order to get the 90%
removal, you must meet all of the design requirements in the IIB guidelines. This includes
pre-treatment. https : //www. swbmp . vwrrc . vt . edu/wp—
content/uploads/2017/11/BMP—Spec—No-9 BIORETENTION v1—
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
9 03012011 . pdf Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
15. Rev. 2: Please provide the latest water quality tracker spreadsheet.
D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP)
Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP.
This plan is approved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The erosion control
plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-402.
1. Clarify the legend. There are two different floodplain hatches with the same label (floodplain AE). Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
2. Provide outlet protection for all pipes (into biofllter, extended detention and S-1 basin). Show outlet
protection sizing calculation. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [Sheet 7] Sequence of construction should be more site specific. Should reference the difference
between phases and conversion of controls from existing conditions (Phase 1) to Phase 2 as well as
conversion to stormwater facilities. Rev. 1: The sequence on sheet 7 should reflect the sequence
shown on sheet 2. Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
The VSMP permit application and all plans may be resubmitted for approval when all comments have
been satisfactorily addressed. For re -submittals please provide 2 copies of the complete permit package
with a completed application form.
Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to
discuss this review.
Process;
After approval, plans will need to be bonded. The bonding process is begun by submitting a bond estimate
request form and fee to the Department of Community Development. One of the plan reviewers will
prepare estimates and check parcel and easement information based on the approved plans. The County's
Management Analyst will prepare bond agreement forms, which will need to be completed by the owner
and submitted along with cash, certificates or sureties for the amounts specified. The agreements will need
to be approved and signed by the County Attorney and County Engineer. This may take 2-4 weeks to
obtain all the correct signatures and forms.
Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance agreements will also need to be completed and recorded.
The County's Management Analyst or other staff will prepare the forms and check for ownership and
signature information. The completed forms will need to be submitted along with court recording fees.
After bonding and agreements are complete, county staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ
database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local
VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid
directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the
application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the
application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county.
After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre -construction conference.
Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre -construction conference form, and pay the remainder
of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee
remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre -construction
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre -construction conference, should
everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that
work may begin.
County forms can be found on the county website forms center under engineering;
htip://www.albemarle.org/deptfonns.asp?department--cdenoMo
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
VSMP Permit plan review
Project title: Old Trail Village Block 32 VSMP
Project file number: WP0201800077
Plan preparer:
Roudabush,Gale And Assoc. Ufox@roudabush.com]
Owner or rep.:
March Mountain [dave@oldtrailvillage.com]
Plan received date:
22 Oct 2018
Rev. 1 received:
22 Feb 2019
Date of comments:
19 Nov 2018
Rev. 1 comments:
01 April 2019
Reviewers:
Emily Cox
County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to
act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is denied. The
rationale is given in the comments below. The application may be resubmitted for approval if all
the items below are satisfactorily addressed. The VSMP application content requirements can be
found in County Code section 17-401.
A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
The SWPPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-405. A SWPPP must
contain (1) a PPP, (2) an ESCP, (3) a SWMP, and (4) any TMDL measures necessary.
1. Provide an updated, signed registration statement for Old Trail that includes the disturbance from
this proposed development. Rev. 1: Please provide a map showing the overall coverage on the
current DEQ registration statement. (what the 136.08 acres encompasses).
2. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master SWPPP for Old Trail. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP)
The PPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-404.
1. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master PPP for Old Trail. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a
SWMP. This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The
stormwater management plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-403.
1. [cover sheet] List title of plan/exhibit and date of approval for critical slopes
analysis/determination. (8-30-18, Critical Slope Exhibit Old Trail Village Block 32) Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
2. [cover sheet] List title of and date of approval of floodplain development permit. (11-6-18,
FDP201800018) Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [cover sheet] Update the plan number to be WP0201800077. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
4. Sheets 5 & 6 should provide a narrative stating the difference between the master plan and this
proposed/actual plan. Differing drainage areas were shown, however, must show overall
compliance with the master plan such as allowable flows and removal rates, etc. Approved plan
information was provided, however actual, proposed information showing compliance is not clear.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
5. Provide routings for stormwater facilities. (not on the plans, separate calculation booklet is fine).
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
6. What are the proposed WSE's of the S-1 facility? Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
7. Location of the existing emergency spillway for the extended detention is unclear. Please clearly
show the location and dimensions. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
8. For the extended detention, Per 3.07-24 of the VA SWM HB, show the proposed buffer zone.
Rev. 1: Buffer appears to conflict with lot 92. Also the lot line for Lot 92 appears to
encroach into the SWM facility. The SWM facility easement must extend around the buffer.
Please show this on the lot. Also show the proposed building location to ensure it does not
encroach into the SWM facility easement.
9. For the bioretention, show surface area sizing Per Table 3.11-4 of VA SWM HB. Rev. 1: Per
your response to comment 14, design should not be shown based on the SWM HB. It should
be shown to comply with IIB design. https : / /www. swbmp . vwrrc . vt . edu/wp—
content/uploads/2017/11/BMP—Spec—No-9 BIORETENTION v1-
9 03012011.pdf
10. Provide pipe calculations and DA for all pipes associated with SWM (outfall, etc). Other pipes
will be shown in the site plan or road plan, correct? Rev. 1: 5B to 6B shows a velocity over 15
ft/s.
11. Provide planting/landscape plan for proposed extended detention/biofilter area. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
12. Ensure the proposed disturbance to the stream buffer complies with the areas approved in the
ZMA. Table 9 of the master plan, Conceptual Buffer Encroachment, does not show any for S-1 or
S-13. Sheet 3 of the ZMA, SWM and stream conservation plan, does not appear to show any
disturbance either. However, section 4.2.2.9 does discuss buffer encroachment in the S-13
discussion. Rev. 1: If buffer mitigation is to comply with the master plan, simply reference
the master plan WPO # and remove the applicable sheets. However, if that is the case, this
plan cannot be approved until that master plan is approved.
13. Provide the construction record drawing requirements on the plan.
hLtp://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/fonns center/departments/Community_ Development/for
ms/Engineering and _WPO_Forms/WPO_VSMP_Construction _ Record Drawings Policy 23Ma
. 2�pdf Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
14. It was hard to read the text, but on Sheet 09, was 90% efficiency used for bioretention? Table 5-14
in the VA SWM HB does not show a 90% option. Please clarify. Rev. 1: In order to get the 90%
removal, you must meet all of the design requirements in the IIB guidelines. This includes
pre-treatment. https : / /www. swbmp . vwrrc . vt . edu/wp—
content/uploads/2017/11/BMP—Spec—No-9 BIORETENTION v1-
9 03012011.pdf
D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP)
Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The erosion
control plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-402.
1. Clarify the legend. There are two different floodplain hatches with the same label (floodplain AE). Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
2. Provide outlet protection for all pipes (into biofilter, extended detention and S-1 basin). Show outlet
protection sizing calculation. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [Sheet 7] Sequence of construction should be more site specific. Should reference the difference
between phases and conversion of controls from existing conditions (Phase 1) to Phase 2 as well as
conversion to stormwater facilities. Rev. 1: The sequence on sheet 7 should reflect the sequence
shown on sheet 2.
The VSMP permit application and all plans may be resubmitted for approval when all comments have
been satisfactorily addressed. For re -submittals please provide 2 copies of the complete permit package
with a completed application form.
Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to
discuss this review.
Process;
After approval, plans will need to be bonded. The bonding process is begun by submitting a bond estimate
request form and fee to the Department of Community Development. One of the plan reviewers will
prepare estimates and check parcel and easement information based on the approved plans. The County's
Management Analyst will prepare bond agreement forms, which will need to be completed by the owner
and submitted along with cash, certificates or sureties for the amounts specified. The agreements will need
to be approved and signed by the County Attorney and County Engineer. This may take 2-4 weeks to
obtain all the correct signatures and forms.
Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance agreements will also need to be completed and recorded.
The County's Management Analyst or other staff will prepare the forms and check for ownership and
signature information. The completed forms will need to be submitted along with court recording fees.
After bonding and agreements are complete, county staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ
database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local
VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid
directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the
application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the
application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county.
After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre -construction conference.
Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre -construction conference form, and pay the remainder
of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee
remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre -construction
conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre -construction conference, should
everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that
work may begin.
County forms can be found on the county website forms center under engineering;
hlt2://www.albemarle.ora/deptforms.asp?department--cdengno
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
Short Review Comments Report for:
SUB201900016
SubApplication Type:
LOT 12 AND TRACTS 3-A2 & 3-A3 - RURAL DIVISION
Rural Division
Date Completed:05/14/2019
Reviewer:Tori Kanellopoulos CDD Planning
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:02/26/2019
Reviewer:Tori Kanellopoulos CDD Planning
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Comments mailed (snail mail) and faxed on 2/26/2019.
Division:
Date Completed:03/20/2019
Reviewer:Adam Moore VDOT
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:14-316 entrance onto public streets- needed for both TMP's being divided.
Division:
Date Completed:03/20/2019
Reviewer:Tori Kanellopoulos CDD Planning
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:04/26/2019
Reviewer:Josh Kirtley Health Department
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:Soil work received 3/19 and sent 3/20.
Division:
Page:1 of 1 County of Albemarle Printed On:May 16, 2019
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
VSMP Permit plan review
Project title: Old Trail Village Block 32 VSMP
Project file number: WP0201800077
Plan preparer: Roudabush,Gale And Assoc. Ufox@roudabush.com]
Owner or rep.: March Mountain [dave@oldtrailvillage.com]
Plan received date: 22 Oct 2018
Date of comments: 19 Nov 2018
Reviewers: Emily Cox
County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to
act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is denied. The
rationale is given in the comments below. The application may be resubmitted for approval if all
the items below are satisfactorily addressed. The VSMP application content requirements can be
found in County Code section 17-401.
A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
The SWPPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-405. A SWPPP must
contain (1) a PPP, (2) an ESCP, (3) a SWMP, and (4) any TMDL measures necessary.
1. Provide an updated, signed registration statement for Old Trail that includes the disturbance from
this proposed development.
2. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master SWPPP for Old Trail.
B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP)
The PPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-404.
1. Ensure the latest, approved sheets get inserted into the master PPP for Old Trail.
C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a
SWMP. This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The
stormwater management plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-403.
1. [cover sheet] List title of plan/exhibit and date of approval for critical slopes
analysis/determination. (8-30-18, Critical Slope Exhibit Old Trail Village Block 32)
2. [cover sheet] List title of and date of approval of floodplain development permit. (11-6-18,
FDP201800018)
3. [cover sheet] Update the plan number to be WP0201800077.
4. Sheets 5 & 6 should provide a narrative stating the difference between the master plan and this
proposed/actual plan. Differing drainage areas were shown, however, must show overall
compliance with the master plan such as allowable flows and removal rates, etc. Approved plan
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 3
information was provided, however actual, proposed information showing compliance is not clear.
5. Provide routings for stormwater facilities. (not on the plans, separate calculation booklet is fine).
6. What are the proposed WSE's of the S-1 facility?
7. Location of the existing emergency spillway for the extended detention is unclear. Please clearly
show the location and dimensions.
8. For the extended detention, Per 3.07-24 of the VA SWM HB, show the proposed buffer zone.
9. For the bioretention, show surface area sizing Per Table 3.11-4 of VA SWM HB.
10. Provide pipe calculations and DA for all pipes associated with SWM (outfall, etc). Other pipes
will be shown in the site plan or road plan, correct?
11. Provide planting/landscape plan for proposed extended detention/biofilter area.
12. Ensure the proposed disturbance to the stream buffer complies with the areas approved in the
ZMA. Table 9 of the master plan, Conceptual Buffer Encroachment, does not show any for S-1 or
5-13. Sheet 3 of the ZMA, SWM and stream conservation plan, does not appear to show any
disturbance either. However, section 4.2.2.9 does discuss buffer encroachment in the 5-13
discussion.
13. Provide the construction record drawing requirements on the plan.
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/Community Development/for
ms/En ing eering and _WPO_Forms/WPO_VSMP_Construction _ Record_ Drawings Policy 23Ma
2�pdf
14. It was hard to read the text, but on Sheet 09, was 90% efficiency used for bioretention? Table 5-14
in the VA SWM HB does not show a 90% option. Please clarify.
D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP)
Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP.
This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The erosion
control plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-402.
1. Clarify the legend. There are two different floodplain hatches with the same label (floodplain AE).
2. Provide outlet protection for all pipes (into biofilter, extended detention and S-1 basin). Show outlet
protection sizing calculation.
3. [Sheet 7] Sequence of construction should be more site specific. Should reference the difference between
phases and conversion of controls from existing conditions (Phase 1) to Phase 2 as well as conversion to
stormwater facilities.
The VSMP permit application and all plans may be resubmitted for approval when all comments have
been satisfactorily addressed. For re -submittals please provide 2 copies of the complete permit package
with a completed application form.
Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to
discuss this review.
Process;
After approval, plans will need to be bonded. The bonding process is begun by submitting a bond estimate
request form and fee to the Department of Community Development. One of the plan reviewers will
prepare estimates and check parcel and easement information based on the approved plans. The County's
Management Analyst will prepare bond agreement forms, which will need to be completed by the owner
and submitted along with cash, certificates or sureties for the amounts specified. The agreements will need
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 3
to be approved and signed by the County Attorney and County Engineer. This may take 2-4 weeks to
obtain all the correct signatures and forms.
Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance agreements will also need to be completed and recorded.
The County's Management Analyst or other staff will prepare the forms and check for ownership and
signature information. The completed forms will need to be submitted along with court recording fees.
After bonding and agreements are complete, county staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ
database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local
VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid
directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the
application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the
application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county.
After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre -construction conference.
Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre -construction conference form, and pay the remainder
of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee
remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre -construction
conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre -construction conference, should
everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that
work may begin.
County forms can be found on the county website forms center under engineering;
htip://www.albemarle.org/deptforms.asp?department--cdengwpo