HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900028 Review Comments Major Amendment, Final Site Plan 2019-07-15COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Site Plan review
Project:
University of Virginia Research Park — Town Center 4, Major Amendment
Plan preparer:
Eric Woolley, P.E., Woolley Engineering, 200 E. High St.
Charlottesville, VA 22902 [ ewoolley(&woolley-eniz.com ]
Owner or rep.:
University of Virginia Foundation / P.O. Box 400218
Charlottesville, VA 22904 [tmarshall@uvafoundation.com]
Plan received date:
21 May 2019
Date of comments:
15 Jul 2019
Reviewer:
John Anderson
Project Coordinator: Cameron Langille
SDP2019-00028
1. C 1.1 — Please provide Note with date of Maj . Amendment approval corresponding with Major Amendment
Exhibit, since C1.1 shows site development design some years ago, while C2.1 shows existing conditions
exhibit, which is transitional since grading based on C4.0 (current proposed) layout plan is underway.
Without background understanding of approvals or grading /demolition of existing features, easy
connection with or conceptual grasp of design shown on sheets C1.1, C2.0, C4.0 is difficult.
2. Related to item 1., please provide demolition details for portions of C1.1 approved design that either will be
or have been demolished as site transitions toward C4.0 layout design. (discussed 7/10 during telecon with
Woolley Engineering, 11:32 AM)
C2.0
3. Note 6: Ref, Final Site Plan Review checklist Existing Conditions plan view information item 2: All
topography should be visually field verified by the designer within the last year. Please verify topography.
4. Kirk Hughes seal appears on plan. With final print submittal for county signature approval, ensure LS seal
is signed /dated by LS.
C2.1
5. Recommend Note make re£ to survey information on C2.0.
6. Recommend label buildings 1, 2, 3.
C2.2 — Point elevation labels are unreadable and will not scan. This comment applies to fine bold print
across the plan set. Information is so small it is indistinguishable. Please ensure all text is of size and
clarity to be readable and scannable.
C3.0
8. Provide ref, to legislative zoning action that supports by -right use or impact to preserved steep slopes (18-
30.4.4.b.l.g). Provide reference to ZMA, SP, or SDP on C3.0 and CLO.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
g. Legislative zoning actions related to the underlying district_ Any use or structure
approved by the board of supervisors in a zoning map amendment whose
location is expressly authorized in an approved application plan, code of
development, or an accepted proffer, in a special use permit authorized in the
underlying district regulations, or in a special exception authorizing a waiver or
modification of the requirements of section 4.2.3; provided that the legislative
action is still valid and that the use or structure complies with all requirements
and conditions approved or imposed in conjunction with the legislative zoning
action.
9. Label preserved steep slopes; label managed steep slopes. Discriminate via shading or line -type.
10. Although legislative zoning action may allow by -right impact to preserved or managed steep slopes, for any
steep slopes, constructions standards listed at 30.7.5 apply, including 30.7.5.c. reverse slope benches.
30.7.4 PERMITTED USES
The following uses and structures are permitted by right or by special use permit on managed or preserved
slopes, provided that the land disturbing activity to establish the use or structure complies with design
standards in section 30.7.5 and all other applicable requirements of the Code:
C. Reverse slope benches or a surface water diversion_ Reverse slope benches or a surface water
diversion shall meet or exceed the following minimum standards:
1. When required. Reverse slope benches or a surface water diversion shall be provided
whenever: (i) the vertical interval (height) of any 2:1 (fifty (50) percent)) slope exceeds
twenty (20) feet; (ii) the vertical interval (height) of any 3:1 (thirty-three (33) percent))
slope exceeds thirty (30) feet; or (iii) the vertical interval (height) of any 4:1 (twenty-five
(25) percent)) slope exceeds forty (40) feet_
11. Provide reverse slope benches, per 18-30.7.5.c. If managed or preserved slopes are /have been graded
inconsistent with 30.7.5, ensure final contours meet 30.7.5 requirements, including revised grading of
affected sections of site. Surface water diversions are an option (18-30.7.5.d.)
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
d. Surface water diversions. Surface water shall be diverted from the face of all cut and/or fill slopes
by the use of diversions, ditches and swales or conveyed downslope by using a designed structure.
The face of the slope shall not be subject to any concentrated flows of surface water such as from
natural drainage ways, graded swales, downspouts, or similar conveyances.
(§ 30.7.5; Ord. 14-18(2), 3-5-14)
State law reference -Va. Code §§ 15.2-2280(1), (2), 15.2-2286(A)(4).
12. Increase size of small print for clarity, so readable and scannable (Also, item 7., above).
C4.0
13. Provide pavement design for site access from Lewis and Clark Drive. Ref. 2018 VDOT Pavement Design
Guide for Subdivision and Secondary Roads in Virginia; base pavement section on full build -out. Provide
ADT and Dr, Dp for heavy drive aisle section, C7.0.
14. C4.0 should identify areas where each C7.0 pavement section applies.
15. Copy sidewalk, concrete, patio /plaza, and crosswalk details from architectural drawings to site plan. These
civil features require review. Each feature material type should be easily distinguished, via label or legend.
16. Provide note (or confirm) that plaza traffic is two-way.
17. Label sidewalk widths.
18. Provide crosswalk pavement markings (two 6" parallel white lines) at intersections of 8' asphalt trail and
vehicular travel ways.
19. Relocate `2 spaces' (orphan) label to two parallel parking spaces west of building 4.
20. Label travel way width between town center buildings 3 and 4. [18-4.12.17.c.]
21. Similar to 15., provide labels /legend for travel way surfaces, unless all site travel ways are asphalt surface.
22. Label patio /plaza. Label solid dark circles (bollards). If solid circles are stone block bollards, ref. detail,
C7.0.
23. Label 3 unshaded rectangular forms at end of hardscape plaza, at south green park area. What is this
feature?
24. Label feature at end of 8' asphalt trail at Lewis and Clark Drive, which may be a detectable surface ramp.
25. C4.1: please revise small unreadable type.
26. C4.3: 415' and 480' sight lines confuse. For any speed limit, sight lines are an equal length in either
direction. Please clarify.
C5.0
27. Please enlarge unreadable print.
28. Please revise proposed grade per 18-30.7.5.c., or provide surface water diversions per 18-30.7.5.d. Also,
item 11.
C5.1
29. Please enlarge unreadable print.
30. Provide additional spot elevations to ensure patio /plaza drains to inlets, and so that drainage may be
evaluated.
31. Several spot shot elevations near lower edge of plan sheet appear errant; for example: 545.5, 545.4.
32. Label bollards, inlets, all symbol features, or provide legend that defines symbols.
C6.0
33. Provide profiles for yard drains and trench drains, especially any drainage structure serving the patio /plaza.
34. C6.0 tables list inlet type `DI' while C6.3 lists the same structures as MHs. Compare and revise C6.0 table
descriptors or C6.3 storm drain profile labels, as needed.
35. Storm lines are obscured; in places, nearly entirely hidden. Storms lines must be visible on this sheet, point-
to-point, structure -to -structure. Examples: 106-105, 101-102, 92-94-96A, 88-87.
36. Plaza drainage is unclear. Once spot elevations provided and structures visible, a more thorough review
should be possible.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
37. If email with drainage computations sent, cannot locate; please re -send. Necd LD-204, LD-229 for
drainage design (inlet /storm drain computations).
C6.3
38. Revise pipe DIA label for pipe between MH 88 and MH 92 to 18".
39. Ref. item 34., above, re. consistency with C6.0 table descriptors. Revise C6.0 or C6.3, as needed.
40. Recommend revise proposed 6" and 12" PVC to 12" DIA, Min. Were these pipes in easement, Drainage
Plan review checklist would require 15" DIA, Min.
41. For structures or pipes in fill (as deep as 20'), provide Note with text similar to text image, below; i.e.,
ensure proper compaction to avoid settling and possible failure.
NOTE:
1. FOR MANHOLES TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN FILL,
CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE FILL UNDER SAN. MH AT
95% COMPACTION & EMBANKMENT MATERIAL SHALL
CONSIST PREDOMINANTLY OF SOIL AND BE PLACED IN
SUCCESSIVE UNIFORM LAYERS NOT MORE THAN 8" IN
THICKNESS BEFORE COMPACTION IN ACCORDANCE
WITH VDOT 2007 ROAD AND BRIDGE SPECIFICATION
303.04. AFTER 3' VERTICAL PLACEMENT OF FILL,
CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE RECENTLY LAID FILL
AND INSTALL COMPACTED VDOT STD. 21A STONE IN AN
8'x8' O.C. COMPACTED 21A AREA CENTERED ON THE
MH(S). CONTRACTOR SHALL REPEAT THIS OPERATION
UNTIL AN B'x8' O.C. 21A STONE BASE IN INSTALLED
BETWEEN THE EXISTING GROUND AND THE PROPOSED
SAN. MH BASE IN EFFORTS TO REDUCE THE RISK OF
SETTLING. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ACSA WITH
COMPACTION RESULTS PRIOR TO SEWER ACCEPTANCE
42. L1.0: Cannot evaluate proposed landscaping relative to underground storm drain lines since drain lines
often obscure /invisible. Please ensure no canopy landscaping is within 5' horizontal of proposed storm
lines.
satellite image (Pictometry):
Please feel free to call if any questions: 434.296-5832 -x3069
Thank you
SDP2019-00028 UVA Research Park Town Center 4 071519