Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800085 Correspondence 2019-06-10ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOCIATES, INC. $ A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION s P 1AN0 S4'RVbkINC' Serf-ing t irginia Sister' 1951 ENCINF.FAING LAND PLANNING I'\ A%FF-RI\(fMA,NItIA1h\I \17I(\.FN I)FRNRI%IFN1 172 ,(1[111 1'.\NT01'S DRIVE. Is L. A 1)14 \I()\ I IC1.1.1.0 ROAD .11\I L.'I:\OC. \RT, Rl'. CII.\RLI)'r[ NVTLLI:. \A "411 CI LILIC [I I I NVIIA.h- \ 1"`X)° L\'11.1 1 \tiI J. 1.,fl)[11:I"fER. [ S. L)rl\IR.\\((),i'.i:. P[I0\Ft43-I)47L+-iil_I P110\1 r4,41Q71-02(1' IIR[.\\1).J 1)\\11)%1.R()HIVtilA.R1 I•\\0_4i')7'j-1w4l 1 kX14 i 21)fi 220 I)\\11) \.J4II;I)\\.I.ti. \\INI1 %1.(A:(IRail__L..v [\IOaRot [),III "11.((AI KIWOOP[II.RI.\\1\DAN,L.N. June 10, 2019 Ms. Mariah Gleason Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE., SDP-2018-00085 Vistas at South Pantops — Final Site Plan Dear Mariah, Please find attached the revised plans. The plans have been revised to address the comments in accordance with the following. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(a)] On Sheet 1, please amend the project number for this final site plan to "SDP2018-00085." Please also include the initial site plan project number (SDP2018-00008) on this sheet for reference purposes. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 2. (Z.O. Sec. 32.6.1(b)] Please submit one (1) reduced copy of the final site plan no larger than 11 x17 inches in size. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 3. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(a)] Review of the deed book records and County GIS indicate this parcel (78-20) is 13.12 acres in size, as compared to the 13.31 acres listed in the site plan. Please review and revise these values to conform with parcel records. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 4. (Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(r)] The plans do not appear to adhere to, or include, many items included in the legend on Sheet 1. Please revise the legend and/or plans to be consistent with one another. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 5. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(r)] Throughout the plan, please ensure that all identifying lines are labeled, by connected leader line or legend, and that they are easily distinguished from one another. Please pay particular attention to Sheets 2 and 7. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 6. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.1(e)(6), 32.6.2(a), 32.5.1(c)(4)] Please provide horizontal dimensions for all proposed structures. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(s)] With regard to 11 _ - :'= J . Sheet 8, please include notes if any lines will be demoiished. disturbed. or relocated during const. uction. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. JZ 0 Sec. 2 r5 No)d Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(I), 32.5.2(o)] Prior to final site plan approval, it is necessary to obtain County approval of a plat showing all proposed easements (such as utility easements, stormwater management facility easements, and public use recreation easements) as well as all areas intended for dedication to the County for public use. The platting of easements and lands to be dedicated to the County for public use can be processed all together in one plat application, or separately, however the applicant prefers. Rev. comm. #2: Not addressed. However, staff acknowledge applicant's intentions to revise Special Lot Plat SUB201800176; and staff anticipate submission of a separate easement plat (with corresponding legal documents) to establish new required easements and new proposed easements (and to show existing easements). Please also see review comments #31 and #34. RESPONSE: Plat will be submitted. 1 acknowledge that final site plan cannot be approved prior to all items in comments #34. 11. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(o)] Un Sheet 5, it is not clear it a right-of-way dedication is being indicated by the hatched fill on/adjacent to the roadway- If this is the case, please add a label on Sheet 5, update the legend, and also add a note stating that "the land is to be dedicated or reserved for public use." Please note that any such dedication requires the submission and approval of a plat and corresponding deed of dedication. (See previous note regarding easements.) Rev. comm 92: Addressed. 12. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Please coordinate with Mr. Dan Mahon, in the Albemarle County Department of Parks and Recreation (ACPR), regarding potential trail alignment and potential public use easement boundaries for the "proposed public nature trail" noted on Sheet 3. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 13. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(s)] On Sheet 3, please include with the "proposed public nature trail' label a note that the final site plan represents an approximate alignment, and the final alignment will be determined by County Staff and built in partnership with the County. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 14. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(a)] On Sheet 1, please provide a list of planned recreation amenities and reference/note the approved Request for Substitution of Required Recreation Areas and Facilities dated September 20, 2018. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 15. [Z.O. Sec. 4.16.2.1] The tot lot area must be fenced to provide a safe environment for young children due to the proximity of steep slopes, the travelway and parking area, and South Pantops Drive. Please demonstrate that this tot lot fencing requirement is met by showing a visual depiction of a fence and by adding a note andlor label. Rev. comm #2: Addressed please -- - approximate ciubnouse ',tt!'t i -. Bui ding 3 Rev. comm #2: Addressed. ji .i •✓'..r ,#f.=1 ry/l�rl tiffs _ - ., pleas, _ — y:� .. .sit _ _ sltk-. Ur Ie.j l:jj L..l''i1c�. tE ry�. f'J rp- IIExe l{iC' r"e�d i-, J- ucru rent r>ar.le and as°a, Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 1 & [Z.O. Sec. 4.12.17(c)(1)] The parking layout, between the surface lot in front of Building 3 leading to the podium parking in Building 2, does not meet code requirements for two-way access. The required minimum width is 20 feet. Please revise the parking schedule to conform to code requirements. Rev. comm 92: Addressed. 19. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(n)] Please provide the proposed paving materials or other surface materials forall walks, parking lots, and driveways. *Unaddressed comment from the Initial Plan approval. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 20. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(n)] Please show the proposed location(s) of outdoor trash containers. *Unaddressed comment from the Initial Plan approval. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 21. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(j), 32.7.9.4(b-c), 32.7.9.5(b)] On Sheet 8, please identify the location/extent of the existing tree canopy that will be preserved and maintained, as it is being used for the canopy bonus and (presumably) being utilized in lieu of new street trees that would otherwise be required along South Pantops Drive. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 22. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.20), 32.7.9.4(b)(2)] For all existing wooded areas that are being preserved and maintained in the plan to meet tree canopy requirements and/or street tree requirements, please submit a signed Conservation Plan Checklist and include any information required by the checklist into the plan documents, as necessary. See attached. Rev. comm #2: Partially addressed. Staff acknowledge addition of a Conservation Checklist (signed 3119 and 3122) on Sheet 8. However, the limits of disturbance, tree protection fencing, and other project details [as specified in Z.Q. Section 32.7.9.4(b)(1)] need to be shown on the Grading Plan (Sheet 6) as well as the Landscape Plan (Sheet 7). RESPONSE: The tree protection and limits of disturbance line has been added to the landscape and grading plan. 23. [Z.O. Sec. 32-6.20), 32.7.9.5] The current street trees specified for the street tree plantings (serviceberry) do not meet County Code requirements. Please select a large shade tree species to replace the current species. Any large tree species prescribed by the Albemarle County Recommended Plants List, attached, is acceptable. If another species is desired by the applicant, please submit a request and we will evaluate whether the substitution is acceptable. Rov. comm #2: Addressed. : [Z.O. Sec, 32.6i.20), 32.7.9.4(b-c), 32.7.9.5(b)] Please z.1� ;w; it }' :�ii new = v - iocated outside of the right-of-way. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. = - [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.20), 32.7.9] The piaming scheduie depicted on S!)eet 3 does not readily al:ggn vO," rf2t'i-'ianting 30619d�; e table p3 ovidad on Sheet g. Please re iv'w ai+d r&."i3e tlLef'-"' ; 'G a..'Id Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 'ri . .I Sec 8 o-se ge!-ui ,,OE Rev. comm #2: Addressed. . 11 Sec:. 32.�a,2(j}, 2, ". .4� �;_; . the :::.. _ :iL;.i_ �.�.,. easy r c,t .r ; ai ! aaufijuna column within the tree-' category i spe:.i`}0 the Ccl-.'vgory of tree, a3 It - County Recommended Plants List. For example: Large Deciduous: Medium Deciduous: Small Deciduous: Ornamental Tree. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 28. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(c)] On Sheet 7, the contour labels, grading elevations, and symbology used for contour lines are not consistent and, at times, actually appear to use the same line type- Please ensure that existing and proposed contours are depicted differently, and please ensure the contour labels and graphic conventions are consistent. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 29. [Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(s)] Please label the maximum height of all retaining walls. It appears that this is already shown for the retaining wall between Buildings 1 and 3. but please make sure that all retaining wall heights are provided. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 30. [Z.O. 32.6.2(a), Sec. 32.5.2(a)] Revise the Site Data information on Sheet 1 (Cover Sheet) as follows: A. Revise the "Critical Slopes" label to "Steep Slopes" (Critical Slopes are only located in the Rural Areas; Steep Slopes are only located in the Development Areas); B. In the corresponding description for "Critical Slopes," change all instances of `"critical slopes" to read "Steep Slopes" or "Preserved Steep Slopes" (as applicable); and C. Revise (update) the description of the document approved by the Engineering Division (titled "The Vistas at South Pantops Critical Slope Exhibit") to include additional reference to the most recent approval date (3/22/2019). RESPONSE: All notes have been revised. 31. [Z.O. 32.6.2(a), Sec. 32.5.2(a), 32.6.2(g)] As of 511Ui101y" it is the understanding of CDD-Planning staff that some the proposed "Open Space" designations on the Final Site Plan will need to be revised as described below; this will require revisions to labels, notes, and other information on Sheet 3 (Site Layout Plan), and Sheet 4 (Layout Plan — Ground Level Parking), as well as revisions to the corresponding Draft Special Lot Plat SUB201800176. a. After recent coordination with County staff within and outside of the Community Development Department, the "upper' proposed Open Space (identified as an approximately 2.99-acre area labeled as "County Park' on corresponding Draft Special Lot Plat) should no longer be reserved for future dedication to the County due to the overlapping (proposed) SWM Forest/Open Space Easement in this same area. Instead, this "upper' proposed Open Space should continue to be designated as Open Space on the Final Site Plan, but with a new designation as a proposed public use and access easement, and this public easement will need to be shown on the corresponding Special Lot Plat and also the corresponding Easement Plat submission (with corresponding legal documents also being required). b. The "lower" proposed Open Space (identified as an approximately 3.91-acre area labeled as "Greenway Reservation" on corresponding Draft Special Lot Plat) should also continue to be designated as Open Space on the Final Site Plan, and must remain designated as being reserved for future dedication to the County (as has been previously established by, and as is required by, the terms of recorded plat in Deed Book 2913, pages 156-162, recorded 2/1/2005). c. (*) Note: CDD-Planning staff will continue to coordinate closely with the applicants and consultants, as well as all other regulatory stakeholders, to successfully identify a solution to the issues associated with the proposed Open Space (shown on the Final Site Plan) in relation to the proposed SWM Forest / Open Space Easement (shown on the WPO Plan). RESPONSE: In phone conversation and follow-up email from Tim Padalino, dated 20 May 2019: "The Open Space areas shown on the final site plan and special lot plat can and should remain designated as being `reserved for future dedication to the County for public use.' The Open Space areas should not be designated as a public use and/or public access easement. These updates override I supersede review comment #31 from the 5110 review comment letter. In coordination with multiple County Divisions and Departments, it has recently been confirmed that the reservation for future dedication is acceptable. I apologize for any uncertainty and delay that may have resulted from the varying guidance provided by County staff." 32. [Z.O. Sec. 32.7.9.4.(d)] Please add the required "verification of compliance" note to the Landscape Plan. Please include the following standard plant health note: "All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the toping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant." RESPONSE: The note has been on sheet 9 "Landscaping Plan notes & details" under "General Notes & Minimum Standards". Verification of compliance has been added. Additionally, the notes have been added to plan view on sheet 8 to provide additional clarity. 33. [Advisory]: It is the understanding of CDD-Planning staff that any maintenance within VDOT ROW is conducted solely by VDOT; please coordinate with VDOT staff and Albemarle County Parks and Recreation staff to determine the necessity of revising the following notes on Sheet 3 (Site Layout Plan): a. "Proposed pedestrian crosswalk to be maintained by developer" and b. "Location of proposed pedestrian crosswalk and connection point to trail to be determined and maintained by Parks and Rec Dept." c. Note: Permissibility and location of proposed crosswalks are subject to VDOT approval; CDD- Planning staff strongly support the design and implementation of pedestrian crosswalks (with appropriate signage, as may be applicable) across South Pantops Drive, which would also support and advance relevant Comprehensive Plan goals and recommendations. RESPONSE: The northern most crosswalk has been removed per VDOT request. The crosswalk at the entrance has been resolved with VOOT. (see VDOT comments below) 34. [Advisory]: The following remaining approvais are requirea prior to approval of final site plan SDP-2018- 00085: a. [Z.O. Section 32.7.4.1.a]: Water Protection Ordinance Plan (and corresponding legal documents) / WPO-2018-00095 b. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.4.2 and 32.7.5.3]: Easement Plat (and corresponding legal documents) c. [Z.O. Section 32.7.1.1]: Special Lot Plat (and corresponding legal document) / SUB-2018- 00176; and d. Tentative approvals (review status of "No Objection") from all applicable SRC members for final site plan SDP-2018-00085 (see below). RESPONSE: Acknowledged. REQUESTED CHANGES: Rev. Comm. #2: All Requested Changes (Comments identified as #30 — 35 in the first review comment letter dated 12/19/2018) are addressed. Thank you. ];kcfrisory i.'ommentl Please be advised that. prior to a certificate of occupane-, being granted, �at'etv fencing is required along the top of the retaining wall on the southern ed90 of the propern duc to its height. Staff requests this fencing to be added (be graphic depiction and label) to this final site plan. Rev. Comm. #2: Addressed. 3. 1Z.0. 32.6.2(a), Sec. 32.5.2(a)l Re icNk sheet index list and individual shcct titles to ensure those names snatch and are spelled correctly. Rev. Comm. #2: Addressed. 4. 1Z.0. 32.6.2(a), See. 32.5.2(a)] On Sheet I. include in the sheet index a total number of sheets. Rev. Comm. #2: Addressed. . (Z.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(a)) On Shcct 2- please re,. Ise the Legend to acid the word --Steep" ,when describing Preservcd and Managed Steep Slopes. For example. "Preserved Steep Slopcs"- and '-:Managed Steep Slopes". *[fnadch-c.s. ed econiniern lkant the hiilial ! 14m ulywoval. Rev. Comm. #2: Addressed. 6. JZ.O. Sec. 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(h)] On Sheet 2. please label the Flood Hazard Overla\ District. Rev. Comm. #2: Addressed. 7. [Z.O. 32.6.2(0, Sec. 32.5.2(rpj On Sheet 2. the Soil Type Boundary in the legend is not readily distinguishable on the map. Please revise. Rev. Comm. #2: Addressed. Albemarle County Engineering Services (John Anderson. Rev #2 David James) Title sheet 1. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Rev. comm #2: Addressed, 3. Revise index to include retaining wall design for all walls associated with travel ways and parking areas. Retaining wall design for walls integral to buildings 1, 2, or 3 may be submitted with building permit application/s. Rev. comm #2: Applicant will provide following FSP submittal. RESPONSE: All retaining wall design associated with travel ways is to be submitted under separate cover on 06110/2019. 4. Provide retaining wall design for retaining walls associated with travel ways or parking areas that are not integral to buildings 1, 2, or 3. (Ref. site plan and retaining wall plan review checklists; Attached). Rev. comm #2: Applicant will provide following FSP submittal. RESPONSE: All retaining wall design associated with travel ways is to be submitted under separate cover on 0611012019. 5. Provide /show outline location/s of conceptual SvvM detention or treatment systems. VSMP/WPO plan must be approved prior to Final Site Plan approval. (WP0201800095 is under review.) Rev. comm #2: Area of forestlopen space to be demarcated in the field (fenced off) prior to construction. TBA on WPO plans. RESPONSE: See comment #22 from Planning. Limits of disturbance and tree protective fencing to match same lines on WPO 2018-00095. Area of forestlopen space (as per VRRM spreadsheet on WPO) is within the limits of disturbance and tree protection area. 6. Revise Erosion Control, ES-1 Note to ref. 9VAC25-840-40. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 7. Plan Note 3: Revise to eliminate contractor responsibility to obtain state -federal permits. Albemarle will not approve a VSMP/WPO plan unless /until required state /federal permits are acquired. FSP cannot be approved without an approved VSMPNI/PO plan. Permit acquisition is an Applicant /Owner responsibility. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 8. Plan Note 3: Revise to clarify Property Owner is required to post SWM-ESC-Mitigation plan bonds. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 9. Plan Note 4: Revise to read County Engineer, rather than District Engineer. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 2 10. Delete ref. to ISP10 for preserved slope details. Provide label reference to Cri "cal Slopes Exhibit approved by CDD/Engineering on 5/17/18, filed with Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 11. - - -- -- . - - - - - Rev, comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 3 12. n .- Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 13. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 14. Provide!label crosswalk striping. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 15. Label all CG12. Provide CG-12 ramps at travelway/sidewalk crossing locations in plan view. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 16. Label sidewalk width for sidewalk fronting parking spaces located on south side of Vistas Way. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 17. Some proposed parking space /travel way linework is gray; revise to black to indicate proposed improvements. Applies to sheets 4. 5 gray line type, as well. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 18. Label retaining walifs. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 19. Provide /'label retaining wall handrails. wherever wall ht. > 4-ft. Rev. comm 92: Correction > 30 inches. RESPONSE: Labels have been corrected. 20. Label guardrail. Provide label reference to GR-2 detail, sheet 19. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 21. Label sidewalk width facing South Pantops Drive. Rev. comm 92: Addressed. 22. Label South Pantops Rd. right-of-way (linework). Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 23. Provide outline location/s of on -site SWM facilities (conceptual level), consistent with WPO201800095. Rev. comm #2: Area of forestiopen space to be demarcated in the field (fenced off) prior to construction. TBA on WPO plans. RESPONSE: See comment #22 from Planning. Limits of disturbance and tree protective fencing to match same lines on WPO 2018-00095. Area of foresfiiopen space (as per VRRM spreadsheet on WPO) is within the limits of disturbance and tree protection area. 24. Approx. location 100' water protection ordinance buffer leader line may be inaccurate. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 25. WPO buffer location � may require revision; confirm location buffer. Revise leader line, if necessary. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 4: 26. -.-,: parking space. . -- . -' - -_ -�- is._A•. EI�,II •r!_� •!r. . _J=1.1 :.S ' - - . - �- - length =t6'i. Revise island west of this parking space to =);ovide 'shei'ered' length ='8-ft Shear t ir'd;!cares f;rd tr'.i.'k will contact fender of vehicle ;parked in this space at ::at;o1 -re. f:m fa:� ?—'.i'" ts fi'��... '�cE5$ to th,9f is :3-r' 4: irn face -- Erb Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 27. Addressed. 28. Show and label :., Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Rev. comm #2: 29. Label entrance width at narrowest point. Applies to sheet 5. as well. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 5: 30. Provide auto -turn figures for typical passenger vehicle encountering a second typ. passenger vehicle traveling in the opposite direction at: a. Travel way curve just prior to entering/leaving building 3 parking deck. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. b. At curve measuring 17-ft., FC-FC. on approach to 23-space parking area west of building 2. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 31. Ensure aisle width in 23-space parking area west of building 2 is at least 20-ft. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 32. Label parking aisle width (item 31). Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 33. Revise design as needed to provide travelway width for typical passenger vehicles to pass one another at all locations, when traveling in opposite directions. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 34. Provide mirror to aid residents exiting building 3 to minimize chance of collision with vehiclels reversing from parking spaces in the 16-space parking area. Sight distance is inadequate. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 35. In the following locations, recommend stripe 2 spaces as 'No Parking' to allow parked vehicles to reverse, and travel in a forward direction: N corner building 1, beyond stairwell; a. SE corner building 2, beyond stairwell; e. NW corner building 3, before stairwell; Note: Recommendation results in loss of 6 parking spaces. Note: If recommendation not accepted, provide alternate design to ensure all vehicles using building parking decks can reverse and travel in a forward direction without performing extreme, multi -point or precise reverse maneuvers. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 6 36. Label rectangular structure south of Str. 11. Rectangle differs in shape and style from typical DI. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 37. existing Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 38. xapllolc. 20 is if easement width diagsafn =CIDS M Q. 15. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 39. Wa,.. ,s Ices, t�? „�tis:iriu Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 40. IlanerI. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 41. Label slope of storm line between Str. 9 and 10. Ensure slope < 16%. Ref. Drainage plan review checklist. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 7 42. Provide additional detaili'labels for pool deck area of plan (TWfBW, if retaining wall: spot elevations). Geometry of structures in this location is unclear. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 43. Provide/label handrails wherever wall ht. > 4-ft.. including pool deck area. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 44. At tangent section of travel way just prior to entering building 3 parking deck. revise grade labels so legible. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 45. Add flow lines and % grade to asphalt surface to ensure runoff reaches Str. 5. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 46. Revise proposed improvements line type from grayscale to black. Also, similar comments elsewhere. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 47. Provide TWIBW elevations along retaining wall south of building 2. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 48. Show and label existing terrain contours. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 49. Ensure entrance grade :5 4% for at least 40', measured from EP, South Pantops Drive. Ref. site plan review checklist, entrance improvements, item 2. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 8 50. Two (2) servicebeny trees conflict with Str. 7 and 8; revise landscape plan to eliminate conflict. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet12 51. Provide pavement design for Vistas Way based on 949 VPD. Proposed pavement section Dp=8-14, but Dr=14.575. Revise Vistas Way pavement section to ensure that Dp(rovided) D r(equired). Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 14 52. Recommend - 0 . to If - storm line pipe - 0 5(owner must provide ramedy Rev. comet #2: Addressed. 53. a,Aax. grade storrn iina pipe ,s ?6;,.. R wise ; ro(, se - and 10 Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 54. P Co.-, Qi i on,` . comm #2: Addressed. 55.fo `?I e ? i ' Fit o MViiMi7.'' Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 56. Show /label VDOT ES-1 in profile (Str 1). Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 57. Inlet calculation tables are not VDOT LD-204. LD-229 format. Provide LD-204 for inlets; LD-229 for storm sewer design. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 58. Since vertical drop in step-down' MH Stir. 5 > 4', provide 1/2" steel plate in floor of MH: ref. VDOT drainage manual, p. 9-38.Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Rev. 59. Max. water depth for 5.5" inlet throat ht. = 0.458'. Ensure water depths Max. depth. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 60. Sheet 18 Provide MH Step detail. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 61. Sheet 19: Provide dumpster pad detail; ref. site plan review checklist. p. 3, item 8. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 62, Sheet 19: Provide handrail detail. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 63. Sheet 20: Engineering defers to ACFR on adequate geometric design for fire -rescue needs. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 64. Relates to ESC Plan: Email from John Anderson dated 01/1112019: Please provide V-2year at structure 1 (system outfall), and riprap L x W x D design, consistent with VESCH design guidelines (Std. & Spec. 3.18 Outlet protection). Label Str.1 outfall riprap L x W x D dimensions on the VSMPfWPO Plan {WPO 2018-00095), and on the final site plan. Rev. comm #2: Addressed. 65. Email from John Anderson, dated 01/1612019: Right turn lane: • Sheet 12 shows South Pantops Drive typical road cross section with proposed 12' right turn lane. Please revise site layout sheets (3, 4, 5) to show and label proposed rt. turn lane in plan view (unless overlooked). Rev. comm #2: Addressed. Sheet 2 shows variable width Ex. concrete ditch section. Please revise sheet 2 to show portion of Ex. concrete ditch to be removed /demolished. Rev. comm 92: Addressed. 66. Email from David James dated 01/17/2019: pipes 1 (en largediraised. eic ) nade watertight basec upon HGL. {DSM. pg 141 Rev. comm #2: Acknowledged. 2. A!l 6-a: age- from PUrmlic ROW Should C)e s,nowr in an easement. 'Nii'liMU-n irau`s DSM, og 14 ,iv d =� ieqj=remen#. Rev. comm #2: Acknowledged. e a�: Sheet 5 map, Rev. comm #2: Acknowledged. 67. [NEW] (Rev.1) Sheet 3 and 4: a. Provide correct sheet callout for trash compactor. Correct the CG-12 callout along South Pantops (should be CG-6) and page reference label (should be sheet 18) for guardrail terminal detail. b. Label retaining walls over 30-inces and not integral to the building wall design (RW#1, RW#2, etc.). provide max height, TW/BW spot elevations for retaining wall at SW parking lot comer near building #3. Guardrail warranted in front of retaining wall for last two parking spaces. c. Specify UD-3 for proposed sidewalk along South Pantops. UD-3 to outlet to EW- 12 or proposed flume drain str. Show UD-3 in the sidewalk details. RESPONSE: Dumpster, curb, and guardrail labels have been corrected. Guardrail has been added to SW wall. TW1BW spots have been added to SW parking lot wall. UD-3 label has been added to sheets. UD-3 detail added to sheet 18. 68. [NEW] (Rev.1) Sheet 6: Correct grading near entrance where the ditch (to be removed/demoed) and curb/sidewalk meet. Sidewalks shall be generally level with minimal surface warping; cross -slope shall not exceed 2%. RESPONSE: Grading has been corrected; cross -slope shall not exceed 2%. 69. [NEW] (Rev.1) Sheet 13: a. Velocity in pipes (2-1) & (1-Out) & outlet is considered excessive. Reduce pipe velocity to 20fps or less, and outlet velocity to 10fps or less. A possible solution would be to install additional `step-down' manhole/s. b. Show size of drainage area going to flume off of s.pantops. I believe the total drainage area going to is more than 0.02ac. Is EC-3 adequate, if not provide alternative? RESPONSE: Comment #69(a) withdrawn at meeting on 3 May 2019 at County Office with David .lames, John Anderson, and Frank Pohl. Please see sheet 12 for drainage area going to flume. The typo for the area has been corrected. EC-3 is adequate up to velocities of 10ftfs per VDOT. We have a velocity of 5 ft/s for the 25-yr storm. Albemarle County Information Services (E911 — Andrew Walker) "No Objection". Albemarle County Buildina Inspections Michael Dellinger) 1. Add the following note to the general notes page: a. "Retainin walls greater than 3 feet in height require a separate building permit. Walls exceeding 4 feet in height require a stamped engineered design also. b. ALL water lines, sewer lines, and fire ines from the main to the structure must have a visual inspection performed by the building department. c. ALL roof drains shall discharge in a manner not to cause a public nuisance and not over sidewalks. RESPONSE: Notes added to "Plan Notes" and "Utility Notes" on cover sheet. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue (Shawn Maddox) "No Objection". Albemarle County Service Authority Richard Nelson Sheet 5 1. Call -out 1.5 inch meter for apartment buildings. Response: Labels have been corrected 2. Widen easement to water meters to standard 20 feet easements. Response: Easements have been corrected. 3. Confirm with concrete doghouse manhole fabricator that the proposed doghouse manhole D is doable. Response: I spoke with Patrick Rodgers, Winchester Precast, and confirmed that the doghouse manhole is doable. Sheet 14 1. Manhole D should be labeled as the doghouse manhole. Response: Label has been corrected. 2. Have water main crossings on top of storm. Response: Comment addressed via email with Richard Nelson on 512912019. Sheet 16-18 1. Exclude details crossed out as shown on plan set. Response: Details have been removed. 2. Include details, TD-14, TD-15, TD-6. Response: Details have been added. Virginia Department of Transportation (Adam Moore 1. The 12' offset and taper, turning right out of the entrance, is a requirement for entrances along highways with shoulders. However, this plan proposes curb and gutter. Please see Figure 4-10 on page F-109 of Appendix F Response: The entrance has been corrected. 2. Sidewalks must be 8' in width if adjacent to curb without a buffer strip. Response: Per appendix A(1)-71: "No" on -street parking situations 5 foot sidewalk with no buffer strip requires the submission of a design waiver. Waiver request is included with this submission. 3. Please provide more detail concerning the proposed flume; what warrants this and how does this alleviate the concern? It appears that a DI is warranted here instead, which must lead to an established outfall. Response: The existing conditions of the site has no curb and gutter and the water is allowed to flow freely over the slopes to the creek below. Albemarle county planning department has requested that sidewalk be installed along the frontage of this parcel to allow for pedestrian interconnectivity in Pantops. Along with the submission of the Final Site Plan, I have included an exhibit which shows a profile of a potential manhole and pipe that would outfall to the existing drainage channel. The drainage area contributing to the flume is 0.26 acres. A flume is proposed in lieu of an inlet and pipe due to the proximity of the existing waterline, 18" Asbestos sanitary pipe, and critical steep slopes (please see the profile provided). It is the desire of the County Engineering Department to avoid disturbance to the Steep Slopes. The installation of a curb cut and paved flume is the least invasive option. I have also included photos of similar design flumes in the area. 4. The proposed crosswalk markings on S. Pantops Drive do not appear to be warranted. Please see IIM-TE-384. Additionally, please provide justification for any proposed midblock pedestrian crossings of S. Pantops Drive. Response: Resolved via phone call with Justin Deel on 5/2812019. The crosswalk at the north end of the parcel has been removed. Crosswalk at entrance to remain. 5. CG-12s are needed at the site entrance, angled perpendicular to the entrance Response: CG-12 have been added at the entrance. 6. The entire adjacent through lane throughout the width of the entrance must be included in the area of mill & overlay on S. Pantops Road. Include callout on plans indicated this is the area to be milled & overlayed in accordance with the WP-2 detail. Response: The label has been corrected. We thank you for taking the time to review these plans and trust the above adequately addresses your comments. However, please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. Very truly yours, Riki Van-Niekerk