HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201900049 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2019-10-21COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Road Plan review
Project:
UVA Research Park Loop Road — Road Plans
Plan preparer:
Jonathan Showalter, Timmons Group f onathan.showalter(a timmons.com]
608 Preston Ave., Suite 200 / Charlottesville, VA 22903
Owner or rep.:
University of Virginia Foundation / P.O. Box 400218
Charlottesville, VA 22904 [tmarshall@uvafoundation.com]
Plan received date:
25 Mar 2019
(Rev. 1)
13 Jun 2019
(Rev. 2)
3 Sep 2019
Date of comments:
3 May 2019
(Rev. 1)
28 Jun 2019
(Rev. 2)
21 Oct 2019 No obiection
Reviewer:
John Anderson
SUB201900049
1. Rev. C0.0 Note reading There are no critical slopes located within the project to read, `No steep slopes are
affected by this project,' if that is the case. Preserved and managed steep slopes exist on this parcel, which
is in the development area, and should be shown on CO. 1. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
2. Show managed steep slopes, C2.0. Ref. county GIS. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
3. Recommend ref. WP0201900021, UVA Research Park Loop Road VSMP Plan, on C0.0. (Rev. 1)
Comment persists. Engineering recommends Road Plan sheet C0.0 ref. VSMP Plan WP020190021.
(Rev. 2) Addressed.
4. Include public road acceptance procedure on C1.0. Link: (Rev. 1) Addressed.
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/Community Development/forms/Engineering and
_WPO Forms/Road Inspections & Acceptance- Public Road Acceptance Procedure 07-26-2012.pdf
5. Include VDOT IS-1 (Inlet shaping) detail on C1.1. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
6. Include VDOT PB-1 (Pipe bedding) detail on C1.1 (Rev. 1) Addressed.
7. Provide pavement design per VDOT 2018 Pavement Design Guide for Subdivision and Secondary Roads in
Virginia (link:
http://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/Materials/Pavement_Design Guide_ for Subdivision_ and Se
condary Roads.pdf ). (Rev. 1) Addressed. As follow-up: Although heavy duty asphalt section on C1.1
correlates with shading shown for entire extent of Loop Road (sheets C4.0 and C4.1), please include at least
one label on each sheet (C4.0, C4.1) to reference heavy duty asphalt detail on C1.1. Without labels, there is
risk of error, risk that heavy-duty section may not be built. Also, please provide /list full build -out projected
ADT on C0.0. (Rev. 2) Addressed. As follow-up: Recommend ADT be added to cover (it may be; may
have overlooked).
8. Provide pavement section with base stone, base asphalt and asphalt surface depth (dimension) labeled.
(Rev. 1) Addressed.
9. Provide, show, and label VDOT standard barricades at turnout locations on west side of loop road (points
of future connection /Encompass). A barricade is not required at 90-deg right angle in road, but at
Encompass southern /northern entrances where proposed grades slope away. If these turnouts will not
receive roadway extension within 12 months, provide GR-2 to limit damage or injury that may reasonably
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
attend a loss of control incident at either location. Please provide barricade and GR-2 typ. details. (Rev. 1)
Comment persists. Revised to read: `Provide, show, and label VDOT standard barricades at turnout
locations on west side of loop road (points of future connection /Encompass). A barricade is E required at
90-deg right angle in road, but at Encompass s^uTnortherri entrances where proposed grade slopes
away.' (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant response: Barricades have been removed from southern future stub
outs and added to northern dead end of road that will be a dead end until the road is extended in the future.
Encompass will be constructed in parallel with or shortly after the Loop Road is constructed so these roads
should receive extension in less than 12 months from when the loop road is open.'
Guardrail is not required at go -deg right angle in road, iniage, beie ", opfionab Image removed with Rev. 2
comments:
Encompass northern entrance where grade slopes away Image removed with Rev. 2 comments:
10. Ensure SWM-related details (trash rack for SWM drainage structures and Contech ® Jellyfish Filter), C1.2,
appear with WPO201900021 VSMP /WPO plans, as well. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant response: `The
plans have been revised and now include Stormtech chambers and stormwater treatment. These details
have been added to the plans.'
C2.0
11. Recommend provide label ref. to SUB201800171, Lewis and Clark Drive Road Ext. RP, similar to label
ref. to UVA Research Park Sewer Extension project. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
12. Recommend increase text pitch of relevant labels too small to read with ease. (Rev. 1) Partially
addressed. Please see second ifnag belo —text is still too small to read. Images removed with Rev. 2
comments. (Rev. 2) Addressed.
C4.0
13. Align CG-12 ramps at Int. Loop Drive and Innovation Drive. Eliminate skew. Ramps and crosswalk
should be in line with one another at this location. (Rev. 1) Not addressed. Please align CG-12 consistent
with C1.1 detail, detectable warning installed on a radius (top CG-12 image, below Images removed with Rev.
2 comments; bottom image is a 2-street crosswalk crossing). Applicant response: `...we believe that the
current design is in compliance with ADA "Advisory 405.7 Landings" and ADA "Advisory 406.6 Diagonal
Curb Ramps". Landings should be perpendicular to the path of travel to allow for more acceptable cross
slopes for ADA access. The ramp must come down perpendicular to the gutter pan/flow line so that the
pedestrian does not need to traverse the slope of the gutter at an angle. Providing a landing before the
gutter pan would require the ADA ramps to extend back to the north and south as much as 10' which would
make it difficult to tie the current and future sidewalk from the west into the top of the ramp.' Re£ images,
below, from an unrelated site plan. (Even these would require revision to indicate factory radius consistent
with VDOT std.) Final Note: on recent VDOT /county bond reduction inspections, VDOT has identified
proposed design as inconsistent with VDOT standard (C1.1); in several cases requiring constructive
change. (Photos, pre /post, available.) (Rev. 2) Addressed.
14. Provide street name sign, even if unnamed, or name pending. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
15. Provide complete horizontal curve data in plan view; i.e. PC -PT, radius of CL curvature. (Rev. 1)
Addressed.
16. Provide speed limit signs. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
17. Please clarify `Future private R/W (Typ.)' label. Is Loop Road a proposed private street? If so, private
streets may not intersect a public road at more than one location. If this is a loop road, it will likely
intersect Lewis and Clark Drive (public road) at more than one location, and must itself be a public road.
(Rev. 1) Comment withdrawn. Private street authorization request has been or soon will be submitted.
18. If Loop Road is a proposed private street, please ref. Ch. 14 for private street request procedure. (Rev. 1)
Partially addressed. Applicant response: `Per email to Tim Padalino May 31St road appears to be in
compliance with county code. Please provide more information on what is required for this project.' Please
ref. Tim Padalino email (6/18/2019 9:40 AM) to UVA Foundation /Timmons Group, for what is required.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
(Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant response: `Further meetings and coordination with Tim have satisfied his
comments.'
19. C4.0 /C4.1: Recommend `Ped-crossing Ahead' signs for Loop Road in advance of crosswalks. (Rev. 1)
Addressed.
20. Recommend caution sign on Loop Road prior to Innovation /Lewis and Clark that notifies `Emergency Fire
/Rescue Entrance Ahead.' (Rev. 1) Comment withdrawn.
C4.0:
21. Show proposed SWM Facility / Access /Drainage Easements. (Rev. 1) Partially addressed. As follow-up:
Please revise labels that read 10' wide grass access road' and `drainage easement' to read `SWM Access
Easement' and `SWM Facility and Drainage Easement.' (Rev. 2) Addressed.
22. Provide curb break /mountable curb to provide SWM Facility Access (ACDSM, pg. 12). Provide access
label or note on plan and linework with proposed grading that meets ACDSM standard, text image, below,
for dry pond Access (image removed with Rev. 1): (Rev. 1) Addressed.
23. Provide typ. detail, transition from CG-6 to mountable (rolltop) curb at point of SWM facility access.
(Rev. 1) Addressed.
C4.1
24. The same line is labeled 67' wide R/W and Future Private R/W. Please see item 17. Clarify. (Rev. 1)
Partially addressed. As follow-up: Please restore 67' (private R/W) dimension wherever travel way width
is 24'. Dimensional information has bearing on bond estimates, offsets, potential design conflicts, etc.
(Rev. 2) Addressed.
25. Provide `No Parking' signs at regular intervals, since no on -street parking. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
26. 10' wide utility corridor may be sufficient to install utilities if water /sewer are located within roadway
prism, as proposed, but wider utility corridor/s may be required if VDOT policy requires san./water utility
lines to relocate outside the roadway prism. Note, for example, ACSA minimum horizontal separation for
water and sanitary sewer facilities. (Rev. 1) Comment withdrawn. Applicant response: `The road is to be
private and not a VDOT road.'
27. Provide plan note outlining sequence of removal for Ex. septic field, and that references any VDH permit
number, or permit requirements that may guide construction in vicinity of area marked `Approximate
Location of Ex. septic Field per plans...' (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant response: `The existing septic
field will be removed as a part of the UVA Research Park Sewer Extension project.'
28. C4.2 shows proposed 8" PVC (SSWR) passing beneath multiple storm pipes. Please consider recent
VDOT Culpeper bridge and drainage guidance concerning utilities placed over or under structures to be
maintained by VDOT, and coordinate with VDOT to revise design as needed. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
Applicant response: `The proposed Road is private. Per conversation with Richard Nelson, we will be
allowed to run the proposed 8" SSWR under the storm pipe.'
29. C4.3 shows proposed 8" water line passing beneath multiple storm pipes. Please consider recent VDOT
Culpeper District guidance concerning utilities placed over or under structures to be maintained by VDOT,
and coordinate with VDOT to revise design as needed. (Rev. 1) Addressed. See item 28., above.
C5.0:
30. Ensure dry pond design details on RP match design details on WP0201900021, or preferably limit design
detail provided for dry pond on the Road Plan to conceptual outline, with ref. to WP0201900021. (Rev. 1)
Addressed. Applicant response: `Acknowledged. Plan set is designed as one package for construction and
select sheets are added or removed to make up road plan and VSMP plan.'
31. Label or delete blue circle lines. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Image removed with Rev. 2 comments
32. Provide spot elevations and labels that ensure positive drainage in vicinity of right angle turn in road, to
ensure westbound /entrance storm runoff on Loop Road reaches Str. 104. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
33. Revise inlet location or lengths since spread (T) > 8-ft at Str. 122, 212. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
34. C5.3: Provide cross drains per road plan checklist for reviewers, pg. 4 (`locations shown and labeled
with 'Vi)UT designations (CD-1,2) at every major cut and lilt transition or sag curve'). Design
appears to require eight (8) cross -drains (2 sag curves, 6 cut/fill transitions). (Rev. 1) Addressed.
35. C6.0, C6.1: Remove from Road Plan. Include with VSMP /WPO Plan. Review comments for these plan
sheets will be included with WPO plan review comments. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
C7.0
36. Provide 95% compaction note for area of fill at Sir. 112, profile Str 112 — Str 100. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
37. Provide profile, Str. 114 — 112. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
38. VSMP Plan and Road Plan Design Calculations & Narrative, 3/25/19:
a. SWM Quantity Narrative —Include information highlighting (via prior -approved table, graphic,
narrative, zoning, site, or WPO data) how eastern side of project drains to a large wet pond that
was designed to handle stormwater quantity for the full build out of the research park.
Recommend information identical to Timmons Group Lewis and Clark Drive Road Extension
VSMP Plan and Road Plan Design Calculations & Narrative booklet, d. 3/25/19, pg. 18-19. (Rev.
1) Addressed. Reference calculation booklet, last pp.
b. LD-204 (Rev.1) Partially addressed. As follow-up: items ii., iii., below — image-, beloNN Image
removed with Rev. 2 comments:
i. Revise at Str. 122, 212. (Rev.1) Addressed.
ii. Check height of curb opening (typ. 5.5" or 0.46) (Rev.1) Not addressed. (Rev. 2)
Addressed.
iii. Check d/h. Anticipate values < 1.0. (Rev.1) Not addressed. Please see image below.
If review error, please notify; data in height of curb and d/h columns is confusing. (Rev. 2)
Addressed.
c. SWM routing comments will be included with WPO201900021 plan review comments.
39. New: Revise index by striking through C3.0, C3.1, C3.2, C3.3. ESC sheets not included with Road Plan.
(Rev. 2) Addressed.
Ifyou have questions, please contact me atjanderson2@,albemarle.org or at 434.296-5832-0069.
Thank you for your help and patience.
J. Anderson
SUB201900049 UVA Research Park Loop Rd RP_ 1 02119rev2