HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800031 Correspondence Final Site Plan and Comps. 2019-10-08ALAN FRAN KLI N PE, LLC
427 Cranberry Lane
Crozet, Virginia 22932
(434) 531-5544
alan@alanfranklinpe.com
October 8, 2019
Mr. Christopher Perez
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
RE: Rivanna Village Phase 2 (Blocks D, F, G, I, and J) Final Site Plan - 4thSubmittal (SDP2018-31)
Dear Chris,
Please accept for review and approval the attached revised final site plans which attempt to address
all of the agency initial plan review comments. This letter is intended to accompany the revised plans
and serve as written response to the comment letter dated January 4, 2019. Each reviewer that
provided comments will receive revised plans and response letter directly.
Planning (Christopher Perez)
1. ([ZMA201300012 Proffers] All proffers shall be adhered to as dictated in the proffers.
Response: Noted.
Final: Comment still relevant.
Response: No action required.
Rev2: Comment still relevant.
Response: No action required.
2. [COD Sec 3.3] Lot Regulation/Setbacks. Final- Comment addressed.
3. [COD Sec 3.4] Building Height. Final.- Comment addressed.
4. ([COD Sec 7.1] Parking. Rev2• Comment addressed.
5. [ZMA201300012 Proffer 9] Affordable Housing. Rev1: Comment addressed.
6. [ZMA201300012 Proffer 2] Cash Proffer for Capital Improvement. Final- Comment still relevant
Response: No action required for plan approval.
7. ZMA201300012 Proffer 7] Rte 250 Landscape Buffer and Right of Way Dedication. Label,
dimension, and depict the required 70' reservation zone and the 30' landscape buffer along Rte
250. These improvements shall be reserved for public use and dedicated upon the request of
the County. The developer shall preserve the existing vegetation in this area as described in the
proffer.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
8. [COD Sec 3.2(4)] Density Regulations. Revl: Comment addressed.
9. [COD Sec 8] Open Space/Greenspace Preservation. Final- Comment addressed.
10. COD Sec 8] Open Space/Greenspace Preservation. Prior to final site plan approval, the Director
of Parks and Recreation is required to approve a park plan, which shall ensure amenities
provided meet the needs of the County and satisfy the rezoning.
Rev 2. See Parks and Recreation comments #56 through #63 provided below.
Response: The park plans have been revised to address comments #56 through #63 and reflect
the review meetings with Parks and Rec. See response below.
11. [COD Sec 8] Open Space/Greenspace Preservation. The wetlands areas in the park shall be
labeled as "Preserved Wetland Areas". Omit the reference to "Future Park" on sheet 4, as this
area shall be part of the park with phase 2 of development.
Final: Comment addressed.
12. [COD Sec 8] Open Space/Greenspace Preservation. Rev2: Comment addressed
13. [COD Sec 8] Open Space/Greenspace Preservation. Final: Comment addressed
14. [Comment] On either sheet 4 or 5 provide a table of content overlay, which labels which sheets
each section of various blocks can be found on. Final: Comment addressed
15. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Existing or platted streets. Label all streets (public) and all alleys (private).
Provide directional arrows on each alley to signify one way or two-way traffic. Also, provide the
widths of all streets. Final: Comment addressed
16. (32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Alleys. Final: Comment addressed
17. [ZMA201300012 Proffer 3] Route 250 and Eastern Entrance Improvements. "The owner shall
either construct left and right turn lanes on Route 250 at the eastern entrance to the property or
bond these improvements prior to approval of the first site plan or subdivision plat for the
development..."
Rev2: Comment still relevant.
Response: Road Plan application made on 10/02/2019. The Road Plans are a duplicate of the
Final Site Plans because all relevant road plan data is included in the Final Site Plans.
18. [Code of Development Section 4.2] Covenants to Provide Architectural Review Committee. Prior
to final site plan and/or final subdivision plat approval a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions
and Restrictions for Rivanna Village shall be reviewed/approved by the County Attorney's office
in consultation with County Planning staff. The above document shall be approved by the County
and recorded by the developer prior to final site plan and/or final subdivision plat approval. The
DB page reference information of this recorded document shall be noted on the final site plan
and/or final subdivision plat.
Rev2: Comment still relevant.
Response: The Phase 1 HOA documents will be revised and submitted for review and approval
under separate cover prior to site plan approval.
19.[32.6.26)] Landscape plan. A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 is required with
the final site plan. Final: Comment addressed.
20. [32.5.2(n)] Proposed Improvements. Rev1 Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.2(n)] Proposed improvements. How is daily household trash going to be disposed of for
these units? Final: Comment addressed.
22. [32.7.4.2] Easements for stormwater management facilities. Final: Comment addressed.
23. [32.8.2, 14-311] Infrastructure improvement plans. Road plans must be approved and built or
bonded prior to approval. Fire and Rescue has commented that the road widths are not
adequate for on street parking. If on street parking is to be provided assure the roads are
widened and that the spaces are dimensioned and labeled.
Rev2: Please submit road plan for review from Fire and Rescue
Response: Road Plan application made on 10/02/2019. The Road Plans are a duplicate of the
Final Site Plans because all relevant road plan data is included in the Final Site Plans.
24. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.7] Screening. Proposed SWM Facilities shall be screened from the adjacent
residential lots. Final: Comment addressed.
25. [32.7.2.1] VehicularAccess to Site. Each entrance onto any public street shall be designed and
constructed as required by the standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. VDOT
approval of the entrance to the site shall be required prior to final site plan and/or final plat
approval.
Rev2: Comment still relevant.
Response: VDOT approval to be obtained through approval of this plan and road plans.
26. [Comment] Provide the dimensions of proposed easements and whether they are to be publicly
or privately maintained. Final: Comment addressed.
27. [32.6.2(e)] Public facilities and utilities. All water and sewer facilities to be dedicated to public
use and the easements for those facilities and shall be identified by a statement that the
facilities are to be dedicated to the Albemarle County Service Authority.
Final: Comment addressed.
28. [Comment] On sheet 1 provide the site plan number and when submitted ensure it is labeled as
Final Site Plan. Please omit Road Plan from the title. Final: Comment addressed.
29. [Comment] [14-409] Coordination & Extension. Rev1: Comment addressed.
30. [Comment] Label the land use of the hatched area adjacent to and fronting lots I-59, 1-60, 1-61, I-
62, and J-48. What does the hatching signify? Hopefully it is a reservation zone for future right-
of-way dedication, if so, labeled it "Area reserved for future right-of-way dedication upon demand
of the County." Rev1: Comment addressed.
31. [Comment] [14-303] Cattail Court needs to be modified to a "30' private street easement". This
private street is being relied upon for frontage of the townhomes.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
32. [Comment] [4.12] Parking. Label and dimension the two required parking spaces per lot for Lots
F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, and F12. Additionally, on the site plan, with arrows, locate the guest
parking spaces for these lots (staff assumes they are along Sedgwick Lane).
Rev2: Comment addressed.
33. [Comment] [4.12.5, 4.12] Location of Parking Areas. Rev1: Comment addressed.
34. [Comment] [4.12] Parking. Rev2: Comment addressed.
35. [Comment] [4.12.6] Parking Requirements. Dimension all parking spaces.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
36. [Comment] [32.5.2(n)] Trails. Throughout the plan label and dimension the trail and the trail
easements (most are but some are not). Also, provide a cutsheet for trail design specifications.
Response: Additional labeling added and a trail section detail added as well.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
37. [Comment] [4.12] Parking. Provide column titles for the parking calculations chart.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
38. [Comment] [COD Sec 8] Open Space/Greenspace Preservation. Please work with Parks and
Recreation to determine the appropriate method to separate and distinguish private residential
lots from the public park (either fencing, berm, evergreen landscaping, or a combination). Prior
to final site plan approval please depict and label the solution.
Rev 2. Replace all Pinus Strobus plantings that are proposed in and around the perimeter of the
park with Juniperus Virginiana plantings. Also provide a note on plan that states that wooden
posts and County Park decals will be provided along the boundaries of all residential and park
areas in Block J. Provide a cutsheet of this feature.
Response: Plantings revised as requested. Wooden posts and decal locations noted on plans
and cutsheet provided on the Park Sheets 69 and 70.
39. [Comment] The final site plan shall not be approved until all SRC reviewers have approved the
plan. Their comments attached.
Rev2: Comment still relevant.
Response: Response to al SRC reviewers that provided comments on this revision is provided in
this letter
40. [ZMA201300012 Proffer 9] Affordable Housing. The affordable housing calculations on sheet 4
are incorrect, this appears to merely be an addition error of the totals in each block. Currently it
is listed as 18; however, 1 believe it should truly be 44. Revise. Rev2: Comment addressed.
41. [ZMA201300012] Application Plan - Open Space Statistics. Sheet 5 of the site plan shall be
revised to accurately label and account for the different areas throughout the development
which are Open Space (HOA maintained in perpetuity - i.e. open space areas with no trails and
not part of the larger park), Linear Park w/ Trail (County maintained once built by the developer
and accepted by the County), and Community Park (County maintained once built and accepted
by the County). Currently the plan lists all these spaces as Amenity Space and does not provide
intended ownership/maintenance. This shall be revised to match the rezoning.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. Convert the space adjacent to Lot J49 from Community
Park to HOA maintained Open Space.
Response: Plan revised as requested.
42. [COD 3.3] Lot Regulations. Rev2: Comment addressed
43. [32.5.2(n) 32.7.2.3, 14-422, 32.7.9.5] Sidewalks & planting strips. Continue sidewalks,
landscaping strip, and street tree plantings along Rte. 250 (the entire frontage of the property).
Rev2: Please locate the required street trees in a 6' landscape strip area adjacent to the road
and located the 10' shared use path behind it.
Response: Plan revised as requested.
44. [32.7.9.5] Landscaping Along Streets. Revise the landscape calculations to provide the required
street tree calculations to assure compliance with the ordinance. Rev2. Comment addressed
45. [COD Sec 7.1] Parking. The parking study shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to
final site plan approval. While staff appreciates the parking calculations for recreational uses,
the ordinance has separate regulations for the Public Recreational facility in which the Zoning
Administrator shall determine the calculations for the use. I recently forwarded the study to the
Zoning Administrator and am awaiting a response to the study. I anticipate Zoning's review
comments of the study no later than 1-28-19 (hopefully sooner). Rev2. Comment addressed
46. [4.12] Parking. This is a publicly dedicated County Park, ADA accessible parking spaces are
required. Provide a minimum of 4 ADA parking spaces for the park.
Rev2.- Comment addressed
47. [4.12] Parking. Staff is only able to locate 88 spaces dedicated to the park.
Rev2.- Comment addressed
48. [4.12.16] Minimum Design of Parking. Ensure all parallel parking spaces meet the minimum
space requirements of 9 feet x 20 feet. This includes all on street parking spaces. To permit
spaces of reduced width an administrative waiver is needed and shall be reviewed and approved
by the Zoning Administrator in consultation with County Engineering. Provide the written request
along with justification and an explanation of how the modification would equally or better serve
the public health, safety or welfare. If the waiver is approved on the cover sheet reference the
modification of these parking space sizes and reference Section 4.12.2(c)(2) of the County
Code.
Rev2., Comment addressed
49. [Comment] Dimension and provide easement for trail on Lot J-1, see sheet 18.
Rev2.- Comment addressed
50. [Comment] Depict and label an offsite grading easement that permits grading and
improvements on TMP 08000-00-00-058AO, which are outside of the right-of-way. Provide deed
book page reference information on the site plan. Also, depict and label all offsite grading
easements that permit grading and road improvements to Rte. 250 which are offsite. Provide
deed book page reference information for these easements.
Rev2: Prior to final site plan approval provide signed and recorded agreements from all the
affected property owners granting permission for offsite grading and driveway improvements. It
appears TMP 08000-00-00-058AO, TMP 08000-00-00-05800, and TMO 08000-00-00-046B0
require these agreements. If other lots are affected by offsite work obtain those agreements too.
Provide recordation information on the final site plan. If required physical improvements for the
project or a land take is proposed, then an easement plat, BLS, or R/W dedication plat shall be
required prior to final site plan approval. Provide recordation information on the final site plan.
Response: TMP 80-58A is the only parcel affected by the Route 250 improvements where the
physical improvements occur outside of the VDOT R/W, on the lot. Minimal grading and drainage
improvements appear to be required as shown on the plan, mainly in the vicinity of the entrance
to Cumbria Lane. We met with Frank Pohl, PE and John Anderson, PE to review the situation, and
they were agreeable to the idea of obtaining a letter of permission/cooperation for this work for
approval. Rivanna Investments, LLC shares access and maintenance responsibilities for Cumbria
Lane so they may already have permission to make the improvements at the entrance. If our
attorney cannot make this determination, a letter of permission/cooperation will be obtained. A
note has been added to the plans requiring a letter of cooperation or an easement, if needed,
will be obtained prior for plan approval. The proposed work adjacent to TMP 80-58 and TMP 80-
46B is within the existing VDOT right-of-way so we do not believe additional permission is
required at these to lots.
51. [Comment] Is the offsite sewer connection on TMP 80-47 (see sheet 60) existing or proposed? If
it is existing provide deed book page reference information for the sewer easement. If it is
required and the existing easement is not recorded, an offsite sewer easement shall be acquired
and platted prior to final site plan.
Rev2: Comment addressed, see Sheet 37 for recordation information of recorded ACSA
easement.
52. [Comment] Sheet 51, Lot 1-36 has an "Amenity Space" note on it. Is this accurate? Amenity
space shall not be on individual lots.
Rev2: Comment addressed
53. [Comment] Pending review comments from ACSA, Parks and Recreation, and the Zoning
Administrators review of the parking study,
Response: ACSA has approved the plans. We met with Park and Rec. department again and they
seem to be happy with the plan provided that the requested revisions are made. Zoning
approved the Parking Study.
54. [Proffer 6] Linear Trails. The project is required to dedicate to the County 13.26 acres of linear
parks and trails outside the Community Park, however, the current proposal only provides 11.95
acres. Revise the plan to provide the additional acreage to the linear park. The acreage from the
fire station's linear park land is not included in the required acreage.
Response: The Amenity/Green Space Table was amended to include the 6.00 acres from Block
K so that the area across the entire abutting Fire Dept. property line within the 60' Construction,
Grading, Drainage, SWM/BMP, Trails, and Landscaping Easement can be included in the Linear
Park w/ Trails total in the table. The new Linear Park w/ Trails total is now 12.88 acres and the
Community Park/Linear Park total is 31.86 acres. Per our meeting on 09/11/2019 with Megan,
David, Rebecca, and Francis (you were unfortunately out sick that day) and subsequent email
from Megan, the sentiment was that this would meet the intent of the Rezoning documents and
proffers.
55. [ZMA201300012] Application Plan. On Sheet 5, accurately depict the linear trails in Block K and
Block A. Provide recordation information on the final site plan for these existing trail easements.
Response: Requested items added to Sheet 5.
56. [COD Sec 8, Sec 3.2 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Residential
Lots 59 and 60 shall be removed from the plans. Redesign the area as a flat multipurpose lawn,
which can be utilized for programming. Also modify the proposed landscaping around the new
multipurpose lawn so it connects with the adjacent multipurpose lawn.
Response: The two adjacent lots were removed. Evergreen trees were moved and contours 362
and 364 were pulled back toward the road to create a flat disposition between the two lawn
areas. The curb surrounding the multi -purpose lawn now has a section the drops down to permit
a flush relationship between the formally -delineated lawn space and the more natural lawn area
beyond.
57. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Please remove and
discontinue the use of all shrubs proposed around the perimeter and throughout the
multipurpose lawn, the lawn, playgrounds, and the pavilion areas. Omit the use of shrubs in the
park as these plantings will require unnecessary maintenance.
Response: All shrubs in the park have been removed from the park (82 IC/ 123 VB / 7 HB).
Associated mulch beds have also been deleted and adjacent surfaces (paving/ lawn) expanded
to infill the former planting beds.
58. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Replace all Pinus
Strobus plantings that are proposed in and around the perimeter of the park with Juniperus
Virginiana plantings.
Response: All White Pines (87 PS) have been replaced with Eastern Red Cedar (87 JV).
59. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. The two playground
areas shall be combined into a single large playground. Ensure this playground area is ADA
accessible with ramps. Also revise the age groups served by the entire playground to be ages 2-
12.
Response: The playgrounds have been joined together as one. An ADA-compliant ramp has been
installed where the separating sidewalk used to be. Grades and dimensions have been
accordingly adjusted and benches have been relocated.
60. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Revise the
multipurpose lawn, the lawn, the playgrounds, the pavilion areas, and the playing field to be ADA
accessible.
Response: All of the paving emanating from the roadside sidewalks to the central green and
pavilions and restroom have always been ADA-accessible. A ramp similar to that now proposed
for the playground is also now shown to be installed to provide access to the multi -purpose lawn.
The multi -purpose lawn now provides barrier -free access to the more casual lawn area beyond.
With the changes to the playground came an opportunity to tweak the grading of the path that
leads to the trail system. Minor changes somewhat improve what was already an ADA-accessible
path. Two benches were added at the multi -purpose lawn area.
61. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Discontinue the
playground's shredded rubber surface and replace with ADA approved double shredded mulch.
Response: The playground surface is now specified to be double -shredded mulch.
62. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Label all fence types
throughout the park.
Response: The notation for fencing at the dog park has been clarified.
63. [COD Sec 8 Open Space/Greenspace Preservation] Park Master Planning. Provide a note on the
plans that states that wooden posts and County Park decals will be provided along the
boundaries of all residential and park areas in Block J. These improvements shall help
distinguish between private and public areas. Provide a cutsheet depicting the design of this
feature.
Response: Graphics and notes have been added to the plan to demarcate where marker posts
are to be placed, which are intended to inform people where private property ends and the park
limits begin. A detail of the design for the marker posts has been added to the plans.
Engineering (John Anderson)
1. VSMP Approval required prior to Final Site Plan Approval.
a. Provide VSMP Plan that meets requirements of 17-401. Response: VSMP Plan for Phase 2
has been approved. Reference to prior approved WPO added to grading sheets.
(Rev. 1): Comment withdrawn.
As follow-up: Revise plan reference to read 'WP0201800007, Approved 5/09/18.
(Rev. 2) Comment persists. Please provide requested WPO plan reference on sheet 2.
Response: WPO reference added to Sheet 2.
b. Provide vehicular access/Access easements to SWM facilities. Response: Thought this was
established as part of VSMP Plan approval. May need further work.
(Rev. 1) Partially addressed; though vehicular access may be shown on WP0201800007,
easements must be recorded. May require further work. (Rev. 2) Comment persists. Applicant
response: 'overlooked this comment after printing plans. SWM facility access routes will be
identified on plan and updated sheet sent to you. May require update to WPO.' As follow-up:
Please address as soon as possible.
Response: BMP maintenance routes identified on plans.
c. Provide receipt of recordation of SWM Facility Deed of Dedication.
Response: Not sure of the status of this. I think this has been handled per our recent phone
conversation.
(Rev. 1) Not addressed; provide book -page reference to SWM Facility Deed of Dedication unless
Applicant plans to record easements with final subdivision plat/s.
Response: SWM/BMP easements to be on Subdivision Plat or on a prior Plat for to finalize WPO
approval.
(Rev. 2) Comment persists. 5/9/19, Engineering met with Engineer/Developer, and discussed
idea of phased WPO bonds, which would require separately -recorded SWM Facility/Access
easement plats (each phase), and would require phase lines to be shown on this Site Plan.
Response: SWM/BMP easements to be on Subdivision Plat. The County Planner has told us we
can't submit Subdivision Plat until site plan approval. Plat that was submitted will be deferred.
Phase lines have been added to Sheet 4.
d. Ref, prior -approved WPO# if prior approved plans are relied upon. Response: Reference to
prior approved WPO added to grading sheets.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
e. Provide Mitigation for stream buffer and wetland impacts. Response: Approved VSMP Plan for
Phase 2 included mitigation for stream buffer impacts.
Rev1: Comment withdrawn.
2. Road Plan Approval required prior to Final Site Plan Approval.
Response: Road Plan application forthcoming. The Road Plan will essentially be a copy of the site
plans as all of the required information for road plans has been in the road plans all along and
VDOT has been providing road plan review comments. One additional item that the road plans
will include is bridge design which will likely need to be reviewed by VDOT in Culpeper.
Rev2: Comment persists.
Response: Road Plan application made on 10/02/2019.
3. Provide trail standard detail meeting Albemarle County Design Standards Manual Std.
Response: Trail detail added to the plans.
4. [Sheet 2], Note 17: Owner shall be responsible for posting the ESC bond. Revise note.
Response: Note corrected.
5. [Sheet 2], Note 24: Appears incomplete. Please revise.
Response: Note corrected
6. [Sheet 4]: Label all wetlands. Label 100' stream buffers.
Response: Wetland and stream buffer labels added.
7. A separate Road Plan is required. Please submit a Road Plan with Application and required fee.
Response: Road Plan application forthcoming. The Road Plan will essentially be a copy of the site
plans as all of the required information for road plans has been in the road plans all along and
VDOT has been providing road plan review comments. One additional item that the road plans
will include is bridge design which will likely need to be reviewed by VDOT in Culpeper
8. (Sheet 4: Provide calculations for ADT. ADT appears inconsistent, for example: Cattail Court 42
Attached units (GI -G42), ADT =200, while Terrapin Trace 14 Attached units (148-162) ADT
=200. Mossy Rock Rd. 18 single-family (J39-J57) ADT =100 appears low, while Meander Way
(12 single- family units, 135-147) ADT =100, is more reasonable. Reference ITE Trip Generation
Manual, most recent volume, when calculating ADT.
Response: The original ADT/street provide came directly from the TIA that was prepared for the
project. However, since the TIA report, the unit count/mix per block has been altered slightly so
the listed ADTs did get slightly skewed based on the current plan. I've adjusted the ADTs to bring
them into agreement with the current plan and unit mix.
9. [Sheet 6]: Rt. 250 Improvements single lane addition typical section appears to indicate 2" SM-
12.5A tapers to zero thickness (0") at edge of 8' paved shoulder, confirm consistent with VDOT
standards.
Response: VDOT requested that the paving materials in the sections "daylight" at the shoulder.
The typical section that you refer to had been revised to address this but it was still incorrect. The
sections have now been revised to what we believe to be the intent of VDOT request.
10. [Sheet 8]/ CONTECH BridgeCor® Arch Structure: Ref. 2016 VDOT Road & Bridge Specifications
for pre -cast arch requirements/302.03.b.
(b) Precast Drainage Structures: Submittal of designs for precast items included in the Road and
Bridge Standards will not be required provided fabrication is in accordance with the Standards.
Submittal of designs for precast box culverts produced under the VDOT Precast Concrete Quality
Assurance Program by a manufacturer on the Materials Division's Approved Products List 34 will
not be required provided the Contractor submits a certification that the item shall be fabricated
in accordance with the preapproved design drawings.
Requests for approval of a precast design shall include detailed plans and supporting
computations that have been signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer having at least 5
years of experience in structural design of precast structures or components proposed and
licensed to practice engineering in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Unless otherwise specified,
concrete
Response: See response to #10418 below.
11. Provide high definition images with legible text details for each CONTECH BridgeCor® Arch
Structure detail. Most text is illegible.
Response: See response to #10418 below.
12. Illegible Specifications for Manufacture and Installation of CONTECH BridgeCor® Arch Structure
is of particular concern. Please provide legible Mfr./Installation text.
Response: See response to #10418 below.
13. Provide PE -seal for each CONTECH BridgeCor® Arch Structure detail. Site Plan PE -seal is
insufficient unless Site Plan Professional Engineer holds PE certification in structural
engineering discipline, and seals each CONTECH detail on sheet 8, not simply plan sheet 8.
Response: See response to #10418 below.
14. Provide structural details, including plan /profile view with dimensions, for reinforced concrete
headwall. Detail on this sheet indicates 'supplied by others.' Furnish plan /profile structural
detail sufficient to evaluate adequacy and integrity of concrete headwall design.
Response: See response to #10418 below.
15. Provide reinforcement detail, including plan /profile views with dimensions, for reinforced
concrete arch footing.
Response: See response to #10418 below.
16. Albemarle County Building Inspections Division permit may be required. Applicant is encouraged
to coordinate with Building Inspections on building permit requirements for proposed 34' -1" x 9'-
211
Response: See response to #10418 below
17. Note: Notes on schematic of proposed Contech detail (top right comer, sheet 8) are problematic:
"Footing dimensions and details shown are conceptual only"; "Final dimensions and details to be
furnished by the Project Engineer"; "Foundation reinforcing to be determined." These notes
indicate final design is to be performed by Project Engineer, relative to arch footings. Provide:
footing dimensions and calculations supporting design for this site and location (soil type, dead
/live load, etc.); final dimensions /details; and foundation reinforcing details. Provide
calculations that support footing design.
Response: See response to #10418 below.
18. Details reference single radius arch: This does not appear to be a single radius structure; check
label.
Response to #10 - #18. Contech Bridge drawings/calculations and Geotechnical Report were
included with the 10/02/2019 Road Plan application. An electronic copy of these documents is
being provided with this resubmittal. All other bridge details have been removed from the site
plan set
19. [Sheets 9-19]: Base sight lines on design speed (posted speed limit + 5MPH). Example: sight line
at Int. Moose Lane and Lazy Branch Lane would appear to be 335'. Check/revise sight lines, as
needed.
Response: The base sight lines for all of the proposed roads are based on design speed of 25
MPH, not posted speed, so I believe they are correct. For existing roads such as at the Route 250
intersection, VDOT requires using the posted speed + 5, or 60 MPH.
20. Sheets 9-19/CG-12: Ramps at perpendicular crossings are shown as diagonal crossing ramps.
Revise per VDOT standard
Response: Corrected as suggested per our meeting and your sketches.
21. Sheet 11: Provide Auto-tum figs. /driveway geometry, multiple lots, including 1-60, -61, -62, -64,
J-1(sheet 18), etc. Propose smooth curves as opposed to angles which necessitate off -
pavement turns (Also item #36)
Response: All of the awkward driveway configurations have been corrected/improved to provide
smooth curves as recommended. Static turning templates were used to verify the improved
design. With the improved layout, I do not believe that auto -turn exhibits are necessary any
longer. Please let me know.
22. Sheet 14: Street Name signs are proposed for atypical locations at Int. Lazy Branch Lane and
Moose Lane, and at Int. Lazy Branch Lane and Cattail Court. Revise to appear in conventional
location on street with stop sign. Defer to VDOT comments for public roads.
Response: Corrected as suggested per our meeting.
23. Sheet 14: Recommend relocate street name/speed limit and any required signs from radial
sections of roadway to tangent sections, wherever possible.
Response: Corrected as suggested.
24. Sheet 14: Revise Matchline (right margin) to read sheet 15.
Response: Corrected.
25. Sheet 15: Provide sight line easement on Lot 1-4.
Response: Sight line easement added.
26. Sheet 16/18, 18/19 (at Matchline) - Label road radii, Lazy Branch Lane. Review horizontal road
curves. Label all horizontal road curve radii in plan view.
Response: Missing road radii labels added.
27. Sheet 20: Revise value in parenthesis to match design speed (60, not 25). Check profiles
captions.
Response: Corrected.
28. Sheets 20/21: Profile ref. to Butterfield and Park may not match proposed road names. Please
confirm.
Response: Corrected. Moose Lane renamed to Butterfield Lane.
29. Ensure arch spans on Terrapin Trace (sheet 24) and Lazy Branch Lane (between Mossy Rock
Rd. and Moose Ln.; sheet 25), the two 8' x 4' and the 4' x 2' double box culvert (sheet 26) pass
the 25-year storm event without roadway flooding. Portions of development have no outlet save
crossing one or more of these culverts. Recent local flooding lends particular impetus to
conservative design.
Response: All box culvert designs analysis increased to 25-year storm check. See attached
calculations.
Rev1: Partially addressed. As follow-u p: Engineering cannot locate culvert design analysis for
arch span on Terrapin Trace, Sta. 18+15(±). Please provide Q2s analysis for this structure,
unless overlooked. Q2s analyses for structures on Lazy Branch Lane are accepted.
Response: Arch span at Terrapin Trace is oversized, not to disturb the meandering channel
banks at this location per our DEQ permit. Q2 analysis not provided due to no constriction of
channel. Please let me know if you still need this analysis when you get to this review. I will have
it done by then and I may provide it to you shortly after this plan submittal.
(Rev. 2) Comment persists. Please provide Q2 analysis, when available.
Response: Q2 analysis was performed and provided to you via email on 08/02/2019. A copy is
also attached to this response letter just to be sure.
30. Sheet 28: Provide paved concrete channel (and detail) between two pipes south of Rt. 250 to
prevent nuisance ponding. Fall between outfall of one and inlet of the other is only 0.5% (0.12'
over 23.5'±)
Response: Paved concrete channel added as suggested.
31. Sheet 28: Provide drainage easement for storm pipe, NE comer lot 1-31.
Response: Drainage easement added.
32. Sheet 32: Provide drainage easement for storm line between SD 2J3-1 and SD 2J3.
Response: Drainage easement added.
33. Sheet 34: Proposed forest/open space easement 1' from edge of basketball court and on a
portion of tennis court playing surface is ambitious. While proposed Forest/Open Space
easements are generally consistent with DEQ Training Module 4, Engineering cannot approve
proposed easements in such close proximity to developed features (sports courts, lots, etc.).
Revise, as needed.
Sheet 34 - Revise proposed Forest/Open Space Easement located interior to Lot lines. Do not
show Forest/Open Space Easements on any portion of any lot unless Owner intends to convey
lots with portions that may never be turf or impervious but must remain open space/forest, in
perpetuity.
Response: Easement adjusted as needed on the site plans. An amendment to the WPO plan will
be required to "match up" the revised site plans and the ESC/SWM Plans and to incorporate any
required revisions to the BMP easement.
Rev1: Not completely addressed. As follow up: Although proposed Forest /Open Space
easements under WP02018000073 were approved, if Forest/Open Space easements are I'
from playing surface, or intersect tennis court, and have yet to be recorded, Albemarle intends to
coordinate with the WPO plan designer to amend easements in limited areas, consistent with
DEQ guidance. County will strive to minimize any delay of issuance of Grading permit for Phase 2
development.
Response: Easements have been adjusted as needed with the revisions on this site plan and I
have coordinated with the preparer of the WPO Plans. An amendment to the WPO plan is
planned to "match up" the revised site plans and the ESC/SWM Plans and to incorporate any
required revisions to the BMP easements.
As follow-up: Although proposed Forest/Open Space easements under WPO2018000073 were
approved, if Forest /Open Space easements are 1' from playing surface, or intersect tennis court,
and have yet to be recorded, Albemarle intends to coordinate with the WPO plan designer to
amend easements in limited areas, consistent with DEQ guidance. County will strive to minimize
any delay of issuance of Grading permit for Phase 2 development.
Response: Coordination between WPO, Final Site Plan, and County Engineering is still on going.
Revised WPO to match Final Site Plan has been finalized and will be submitted immediately
following grading permit issuance based on the approved WPO plans.
Sheet 34 - Revise proposed Forest/Open Space Easement located interior to Lot lines. Do not
show Forest /Open Space Easements on any portion of any lot unless Owner intends to convey
lots with portions that may never be turf or impervious but must remain open space /forest, in
perpetuity. (Rev.1) Not addressed. Applicant response: 'Easement adjusted as needed on the
site plans. An amendment to the WPO plan will be required to "match up" the revised site plans
and the ESC/SWM Plans and to incorporate any required revisions to the BMP easement.'
Engineering agrees. Also, follow-up, immediately, above. (Rev. 2) Comment persists. Applicant
response: 'Easements have been adjusted as needed with the revisions on this site plan and I
have coordinated with the preparer of the WPO Plans [Blossom Consulting/Engineering]. An
amendment to the WPO Plan is planned to "match up" the revised site plan and the ESC/SWM
Plans and to incorporate any require revisions to the BMP easements.
Response: Coordination between WPO, Final Site Plan, and County Engineering is still on going.
Revised WPO to match Final Site Plan has been finalized and will be submitted immediately
following grading permit issuance based on the approved WPO plans. All easements identified on
Site Plan.
34. Sheet 36: Provide yard drains for drainage across 3 or more lots (ref, design at Lots J-12 thru J-
14). Ref. Drainage Plan checklist. Examine all grading/utility plan sheets; provide yard drains
with plan/profile data including invert in/out, rim, and profile: diameter, length, slope, etc.
Provide drainage computations /tables - consider spread, Q10 capacity. Note: Min. pipe
diameter is 12".
Also: Provide yard drains at: Lots 1-32 thru 1-36 (sheets 28132); 1-48 thru 1-57 (backyards,
sheet 29); J-39 thru J-44 (front yards, sheets 33135)
Response: Plans revised to incorporate suggested items to address this concern.
35. Sheet 37: Revise proposed grades that intersect porches, walks, etc, unless intentional.
Response: Grades lines in question corrected/adjusted.
36. Sheet 37: Provide Auto-tum diagrams that show a 2nd vehicle may park next to an already -
parked vehicle: Lots J-20, -21, -22. Revise design to ensure two vehicles may enter/exit and
park in space fronting dwellings (this sheet, and elsewhere).
* Note: Albemarle has received complaint concerning negative experience based on unrealistic
design driveway access, similar to proposed. Provide Auto-tum figure for any lot where design
configuration is similar or problematic.
Response: All of the awkward driveway configurations have been corrected/improved to provide
smooth curves as recommended. Static turning templates were used to verify the improved
design. With the improved layout, I do not believe that auto -turn exhibits are necessary. Please
let me know.
37. Sheet 37: Proposed Entrance, Lot J-20 does not work, revise such that a car may enter/exit
without exceptional maneuvers, without dropping off curb. Albemarle has received severe
complaint post- construction relating to misalignment of apron and driveway edge. Propose
alignment similar to blue line. Examine all entrance aprons/all sheets, especially in cul-de-sacs
and curves (sheet 36, Lots J-1, J-2, for example). Revise as necessary.
Response: Proposed entrance alignment and width corrected as suggested.
Rev1: Partially addressed. As follow up: Design at Lots J-1 and J-2 needs revision.
Response: Driveway layouts for Lots J-1 and J-2 have been corrected/improved
Rev2: Comment addressed.
38. Sheet 37: Provide off -site temporary construction easement required to grade adjacent property
lines.
Response: Cul de sac and grading shifted to provide at least 5' from the property boundary to the
limits of work required.
39. Sheet 40: Sanitary Sewer Aerial Crossing -provide a Floodplain Development Permit Application
to address requirements of Code 18-30.3 if development is proposed in FEMA Zone A /AE
floodplain. Response: Note changed. Not crossing a FEMA floodplain.
40. Sheet 63: Revise d/h column values, Inlets in Sump.
Response: Table corrected.
41. Sheets 64-68: Label each pipe. Provide pipe structure numbers.
Response: Pipe labels added to profiles.
42. Sheets 64-68: Engineering strongly recommends that storm sewer pipe in fill sections be RCP.
Any HDPE or RCP pipe with As -built slope < 0.5% will be rejected by Albemarle, and will need to
be replaced at Owner's expense. Note, for example:
a) '2F' profile:
i. 114.54 LF of 15" HDPE @ 1.75% (placed on 5' fill).
ii. 40.86 LF of 15" HDPE @ 0.88% (placed on 3' fill).
b) '2G' Profile: 50.94 LF of 15" HDPE @ 1.75% (4-5' fill).
c) '2H' Profile: Recommend revise grade of 38.84 LF of 15" HDPE @ 0.51%.
d) '2P' Profile: 82.23 LF of 15" HDPE @ 0.91%.
e) '2Q' Profile: 82.46 LF of 18" HDPE @ 0. 73%
f) '2M' profile:
i. 144.84 LF of24" HDPE @ 2.74%.
ii. 52.22 LF of24" HDPE @ 3.03%.
iii. 31.84 LF of24" HDPE @ 0.94%.
iv. 50.08 LF of 15" HDPE @ 5.73%.
v. '2S' profile: 164.95 LF of 15" HDPE @ 1.81% (5-6' fill).
Response: Storm drain profiles revised to significantly decrease the quantity of storm drain and
structures required to be constructed on fill. Additionally, construction and inspection notes
added to the profile sheets.
43. Sheet 67: Str. SD 253, 2S4 (height str. >12') - provide label and detail for VDOT SL-1(safety
slab).
Response: SL-1 label and detail added.
44. Sheet 67: Revise structure label SD S24 to read 2S4.
Response: Corrected.
45. Sheet 68: Provide box culvert end walls based on VDOT standards. Provide VDOT Std. for
Modular Block retaining wall as EW, if such exists. Show VDOT Std. EW on plans. Provide and
show Wing Wall Std. on plans. Ref. profile of proposed box culverts at Lazy Branch Ln Sta.
31+63 and 26+40.
Response: All of the box culvert end walls will be custom, modular block walls designed by Circeo
Engineering. Unfortunately, there is no VDOT standard to modular wall. The Circeo wall plans will
be provided once complete.
Rev1: Not addressed.
Response: Modular block wall details will be included in the Contech details package. In the
meantime, I have added simple, typical details showing how these improvements can/will be
constructed with notes directing the contractor to use the permit drawings provided by structural
engineer.
As follow-up: Please provide Contech details package (to include end walls designed to VDOT
standards) as soon as possible.
Response: The Contech details package (digitally) was provided via email on 08/02/2019.
Additional details will be included in the Circeo modular wall drawings which will be provided as
soon as I get them.
46. Sheet 68: Specify minimum slope of each proposed box culvert. Albemarle recognizes need for
invert elevations to be adjusted per verification of stream inverts.
Response: A note requiring a minimum slope of 0.50% has been added to the box culvert
profiles.
47. Provide Note stating: 'A11 fill material supporting roadways, embankments, and structures within
the right-of-way shall consist of Type I Select Material as defined in Section 207 of the 2016
VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications and must be placed in successive uniform lifts not
exceeding 8" and compacted to 95% of the soil's maximum dry density as determined by ASTM
D698."
Response: Construction and inspection notes added to the profile sheets.
48. MH Structures SD 2F2, 2F3, 20 2, 2K2, 2L2, 2M9, 2M 10, 2MI 1, 2M12, 2R I -B, 2S-11 are
proposed in fill sections and require inspection by qualified personnel reporting to the Engineer
that installation is per VDOT specification, item #47.
Response: Construction and inspection notes added to the profile sheets
49. Provide VDOT Std. PB-1, General Notes on plans (107.00, Spec. Ref. 3021303 -.PDF p. 112 of
VDOT on-line CSection100)
50. Provide VDOT Std. PB-1, Pipe Bedding and Backfill, Method "A" on plans (107.01-p. 113 of
CSection 100).
Response: Detail added to plans.
51. Provide VDOT Std. PB-1, Pipe Arch Bedding and Backfill on plans (107.03 -p. 115 of CSection
100).
Response: Detail added to plans.
52. Provide VDOT Std. PB-1, Bedding and Backfill/Box Culverts, Method "A" on plans (107.04 - p.
116 of CSection 100).
Response: Detail added to plans.
53. Provide VDOT Std. DSB-1, Bedding for Inlet, MH, and JB on plans (106.15, p. 111 of CSection
100).
Response: Detail added to plans.
54. Provide VDOT 2016 VDOT R&B Spec. Note (303.04(g)):
(g) Backfilling Openings Made for Structures: Backfill shall be suitable material removed for the
structure, although the Engineer may require that backfill material be obtained from a source
within the construction limits entirely apart from the structure, or other approved material. The
opening to be backfilled shall be dewatered prior to backfilling. Backfill shall not be placed
against -or over cast -in -place box culverts or other structures until the top concrete -slab
section(s) has been in place 14 days, exclusive of days on which the average high -low ambient
temperature is below 40 degrees F in the shade or until the concrete control cylinder(s) has
attained a compressive strength equal to 93 percent of the 28-day minimum design
compressive strength.
Also:
Box culverts shall not be opened to construction equipment traffic until concrete has attained
100 percent of the 28-day design minimum compressive strength and has a backfill cover of at
least 4.0 feet. The minim um height of backfill cover required to protect pipe culverts from
construction equipment shall be in accordance with Standard Drawing PC-1 for the type and size
specified.
Response: Notes added to profiles.
55. Sheet C10 includes a proposed 200' taper and 200' right turn lane on U.S. Rt. 250 EBL. While
Road Plan/s for this and other portions of public roads and private streets (if any) internal to the
development will present design information to be reviewed by County, VDOT, and others, at first
glance, a 200' taper may be insufficient for a primary arterial roadway (55 MPH limit). Design for
a similar development entrance located on U.S. primary arterial Rt. 29 with identical design
/posted limits serves preliminary indication (prior to County review of traffic impact analysis) that
proposed 200' taper to 200' right turn lane may require revision to ensure safe movement on
Rt. 250, EBL, at current or future ADT projections. Please reference TIA, by date and title, that
supports 200' taper and 200' turn lane for U.S. Rt. 250 EBL. As stated elsewhere, please submit
road plans as required by ordinance."
Response: The proposed 200' x 200' turn lane and taper are in excess of the recommendations
of the approved TIA, which suggested only a full width and taper and no storage. The proposed
improvements as shown are in accordance with VDOT review to date.
Rev1: Defers to VDOT.
Response: Noted.
56. No portion of the 70' reservation zone or 30' landscape buffer that may in the future be
dedicated to Albemarle County, upon demand, for widening of Rt. 250 may be placed in SWM
/BMP Forest/Open Space Easement. Revise calculations or water quality compliance strategies
that may at present rely on buffer areas that cannot with any assurance be preserved in
perpetuity as forest/open space."
Response: We disagree that this area shall not be allowed to be counted as Amenity Space or
SWM/BMP Forest/Open Space for the project as these designations were always identified on
the rezoning documents. Further research and discussion will be required to address this
comment prior to approval.
Rev1: Areas that coincide with 70' reservation zone or 30' landscape buffer, unless approved
through/by zoning action, exist as proposed SWM Forest/Open Space Easement as a partial
compliance strategy to meet state stormwater management water quality requirements. Other
SWM compliance options exist. Engineering contends that an area proposed as SWM Forest
/Open Space Easement may not exist in an area already designated for possible future widening
of U.S. 250.
Response: The 70' reservation zone has been removed from the SWM/BMP Forest/Open Space
Easement on this plan, pending approval of revised WPO application, and from the Amenity
Space calculations. The 30' landscape buffer area will remain as both SWM/BMP Forest/Open
Space Easement and Amenity Space because, unlike the reservation zone, this area will always
be owned and maintained by Rivanna Village.
As follow-up: R.O.W. Dedication label leader line (sheet 10) appears ambiguous. Please revise
arrow to identify a line (sheet 10). Please confirm that R.O.W Dedication is identical with 70'
reservation zone, else label reservation zone. Engineering anticipates Reservation Zone and
Forest/Open Space Easement will lie on opposite sides of a line in vicinity of U.S. Rt. 250.
Response: Errant arrow associated with the "ROW Dedication" has been corrected. The 70'
reservation zone in this area is an offset from the dedication line. Plan corrected and additional
labels added.
57. Rev1: Recommend revise image of letter/document that appears on sheet 50; recommend print
as black text on white background.
Response: I did not do this. I will work on getting a better image for the signature set.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
58. Rev1: Rather than (or in addition to) listing proffer #10 on sheet 2, Engineering recommends
attached approved CTM be included with FSP (shown on plans).
Response: Approved CTM added as Sheet 72 of the set and reference to Sheet 72 made on
Sheet 2 Proffers section.
As follow-up: Digital submittal ends with sheet 68. Please include sheet 72, and 69-71.
Response: Sheets 69-72 added to digital set.
Fire and Rescue (Shawn Maddox)
Thank you for addressing previous comments. I have spoken with ACSA and flow testing will take
place after tank is placed in service.
Response: No action required.
CDD Inspections (Michael Dellinger)
No objections to the Final Site Plan.
Response: No action required.
VDH (Alan Mazurowski)
No objections to the Final Site Plan.
Response: No action required.
ACSA (Jeremy Lynn)
Plans have been approved by ACSA.
E911(Elise Kiewra)
No objections to the Final Site Plan.
Response: No action required, however, after further investigation on -site it has been determined
that the neighborhood entrance road off of Route 250 does not line up with Moose Lane. We request
Butterfield Lane as a road name replacement of Moose Lane in our neighborhood.
ARB (Margaret Maliszewski)
REV 2.-
204 out of 311 shrubs are proposed as Burkwood Viburnum. To help support plant health, it is
recommended that the species be diversified so that no single shrub type represents more than
25% of the total shrub count. A mix of evergreen and deciduous shrubs is recommended.
Response: Shrub species have been diversified to a mix of 5 shrub species.
Parks and Rec (Dan Mahon)
REV 2.-
See Planning comments #56 - #63.
Response: See response above under Planning comments.
VDOT (Adam Moore/Justin Deel)
1. Per previous comments and responses, oversized arches, including accompanying retaining and
wingwalls, will only be approved if a maintenance agreement(s) is recorded with the County of
Albemarle. Design of all structures located within or supporting other structures within the ROW
must be approved by the Culpeper District Structure & Bridge and Hydraulic Sections, regardless
of public or private maintenance. At the time of this letter, design plans for these structures have
not been received. Once received they will be forwarded to Culpeper District staff for review.
Road Plans cannot be approved until all structures are approved.
Response: Road Plan application made on 10/02/2019, Contech Bridge drawings/calculations
and Geotechnical Report were included with the Road Plan application
2. On Sheet 10 the label for ROW dedication does not point to a line. Please identify limits of any
proposed ROW dedication. Furthermore, if the 10' trail is within the ROW it must meet the shared
use path design standards, or, if it is to be concrete it must meet sidewalk standards. If the trail
is to be outside the ROW, VDOT has no comment.
Response: The errant arrow associated with the label has been corrected. The 10' trail is outside
of VDOT ROW.
3. The stop bar at the Route 250 entrance cannot be within the crosswalk. Please see Appendix
A(1). Response: The stop bar location has been corrected.
Please do not hesitate to call me at (434) 531-5544 or email at alan@alanfranklinpe.com with any
questions or request for additional information that will aid in review of the final site plans.
Sincerely,
O)L qlL�A�
Alan Franklin, PE
cc:
David Harner; HCM Tim Culpepper; Mark Keller
Attachments:
25-yr channel analysis @ Terrapin Lane
Pdf of 9/11/19 email from Megan Nedostup
RATIONAL METHOD WORKSHEET
Project: Rivanna Village II
Watershed ID: 28'-10" Span @ TerrapinTr Date: 7/9/2019
Drainage Area: 5.81 Acres Designer: AGF
c-factor: 0.53 (see worksheet)
tc: 9.49 mins. (see worksheet)
Q(2): 13.05 cfs
Q(10): 17.00 cfs
Time of Concentration Worksheet Weighted c-factor Worksheet
Overland Flow Time Cover Type Area c
Source: Seelye Chart as modified in VDOT Drainage Manual (Fig. Impervious 1.25 0.90
1.5.1.1 on Page 1-13E) Developed Open Area 3.06 0.50
1) Length of overland flow always - 200 ft
2) Calculate a separate Tc for each ground cover condition along the flow path
Enter Length of Strip (ft)
Sample "C" values:
Enter Slope (% or ft/100ft)
0.22 Dense grass
Enter Rational Method "C" value
0.28 Average grass
0.36 Poor grass
Result Tc (minutes)
0.48 Bare soil
0.90 Pavement
hallow Concentrated Flow Time 1
ource: SCS Velocity Graph as published in Virginia Erosion and
ediment Control Handbook, Third Edition (Plate 5-2 on Page V-12)
1) Not intended for well-defined channels - see channel flow calculation
2 Calculate a separate Tc for each ground cover condition along the flow path
125.00 Enter Length of Flow (ft)
6.00 Enter Slope (% or ft/100ft)
Result Tc (minutes) IF UNPAVED
Result Tc (minutes) IF PAVED
nnel Flow Time
rce: Kirpich Chart as modified in VDOT Drainage Manual (Fig. 1.5.1.2 on Page 1-14)
1) For small drainage basins.
2) For concrete channels, use 0.2"Tc
171.00 Enter Length of Flow (ft)
6.00 Enter Height of most remote point along flow path above outlet
.60 Result Tc (minutes)
Flow Time
nes 7.5 ft/s velocity in pipe
.00 Enter Length of Flow in Pipe (ft)
26 Result Tc (minutes)
fall Intensity (Albemarle County, Virginia)
5
9.5
4.9
10
9.5
5.5
25
9.5
6.1
50
9.5
6.6
100
9.5
7.1
values for duration are between 5 and 60 minutes. Use values outside this range at risk.
Channel Report
Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® AutoCAD® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Wednesday, Jul 24 2019
2yr Analysis of existing channel at Terrapin Lane 29 ft BridgeCor Span
User -defined
Highlighted
Invert Elev (ft)
= 359.99
Depth (ft)
= 0.98
Slope (%)
= 1.63
Q (cfs)
= 13.05
N-Value
= 0.035
Area (sqft)
= 4.33
Velocity (ft/s)
= 3.02
Calculations
Wetted Perim (ft)
= 10.13
Compute by:
Known Q
Crit Depth, Yc (ft)
= 0.90
Known Q (cfs)
= 13.05
Top Width (ft)
= 9.91
EGL (ft)
= 1.12
(Sta, El, n)-(Sta, El, n)...
( -9.00, 361.14)-(4.20, 361.15, 0.035)
Elev (ft)
362.00
361.50
361.00
360.50
360.00
359.50
359.00
Section
Depth (ft)
2.01
1.51
1.01
0.51
0.01
-0.49
-0.99
-2 0 2 4 6 8
Sta (ft)
From:
Megan Nedostup
To:
Alan Franklin; "Mark Keller"
Cc:
Francis MacCall; Christopher Perez; Rebecca Ragsdale; David Benish
Subject:
Rivanna PreApp Follow up
Date:
Wednesday, September 11, 2019 1:56:33 PM
Good Afternoon,
I am following up on the rescheduled preapp meeting from this morning regarding Rivanna Village.
Below is a summary of what was discussed, decided, and steps moving forward. Let me know if you
have further questions regarding this information, or if something else needs to be clarified.
Discussion:
• Since the County already owns the Fire Station property, there is nothing to dedicate, it's
already public land.
• The easement for the trail on the Fire Station property can be counted towards the linear
park area.
• The Park dedication is more land than what was outlined in the rezoning
• The total amenity area, which includes: linear park, easement on Fire Station property,
and park is 31.75 acres (with the estimate of 0.82 acres from the Fire Station easement)
which is more than the area outlined in the rezoning and proffers (31.68 acres).
Decisions:
No rezoning, proffer amendment, or special exception is needed. The County already
owns the property, the facilities that were shown on the rezoning plan are shown on the
site plan.
Steps Moving Forward:
• The site plan will need to be updated to include a table that is similar to what was shown
on the exhibit outlining the acreages:
o Easement on Fire Station property: List acreage from plat (estimated 0.82 acres
at meeting)
• Linear Park: 11.95 acres
• Park: 18.98 acres
o Total Amenity Area: 31.75 acres (This total is assuming the 0.82 acres is
correct)
• County Staff will capture this decision within the preapp notes, in the site plan file, and
with the plan changes.
Thank you,
Megan Nedostup, AICP
(pronounced nuh-DAHST-up)
Principal Planner
Community Development Department
Planning Services
ph: 434.296.5832 ext. 3004