HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202000051 Correspondence Final Site Plan and Comps. 2020-06-16VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL CHANGE - CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA (GANDER DRIVE)
CIVIL REVIEW COMMENT RESPONSE #1
TO: Patricia Saternye, Senior Planner
FROM: Kelly Schwieterman, P.E.
RE: Initial Site Plan Review — Valvoline (SDP202000020)
DATE: 6/16/2020
The following is CESO's response to the civil initial site plan review comments received on 04.23.20 regarding the
proposed Valvoline Instant Oil Change at Gander Drive Charlottesville, VA 22901:
General Remarks
1. Please note that additional comments may be warranted after responses to these comments have been
submitted and reviewed.
Response: Noted
Department Review Comments
1. Please provide on the initial site plans, based on the Albemarle County Community Development Comments:
a. CDD Engineering Remarks:
i. The VSMP plan will need to be approved prior to Final Site Plan approval.
Response: WPO Application will be submitted for approval. Waiting for approval of VSMP
Amendment #1 to WPO 200600050 (currently in review with county) before submittal.
A Stormwater Management Facility easement will need to be shown on the Final Site Plan
(covering the UG storage and line out to the existing facility) and recorded prior to FSP
approval. A Deed of Dedication will need to be signed and recorded for the SWM facility
easements. This is filled out by the County and forwarded to the applicant when the plat is
nearing approval.
Response: VSMP Amendment #1 to WPO 200600050 (currently in review with county)
covers all water quality and quantity requirements for this development. As such, plan
has been revised and no storage facilities will be installed.
b. Fire Rescue Remarks:
i. A hydrant should be added in the vicinity of the entrance. The building currently sits greater
than 250' from a hydrant.
Response: Hydrant provide, per comment
ii. A knox box is required. Please add a note indicating this requirement and that the location
can be coordinated with the fire marshal's office.
Page 2 of 9
Response: Note added to sheet C3.0. Note also added to architectural plans
iii. Provide the ISO needed fire flow for the site.
Response: ISO NFF Calculation included with this submittal
iv. If the building is to be sprinklered then the FDC must be shown and must be located within
the 100' of the hydrant.
Response: Building is not sprinklered.
v. Provide recent fire flow test showing the available fire flow currently on site.
Response: Fire flow test attached with this submittal
c. ACSA Remarks:
i. There is an existing sewer lateral stubout for this parcel. If it is not going to be used, it will
need to be abandoned at the sewer main.
Response: Existing sewer lateral for the parcel has been added to the plans and will be
utilized.
Planters Bank has a sewer lateral crossing this site. Ensure it will not be impacted with
what is proposed.
Response: Planters Bank sewer lateral added to plans.
iii. Provide fixture counts to confirm water meter size.
Response: There are 15 fixtures. The fixtures are (1) water closet, (3) sinks, (2) water
coolers, (2) hose bibs, (2) wall hydrants, (2) eyewash mixing valves, (1) eyewash station,
(1) icemaker, and (1) washer fluid mixing valve.
iv. The irrigation meter should not be behind the domestic water meter.
Response: Irrigation meter provided in front of domestic meter and tapped from existing
2" service line
v. Pressures in the area are above 80psi. A private pry will be needed.
Response: Pressure reducing valve for domestic line provided in interior of building. PRV
provided on irrigation line.
vi. Confirm if Fire/Rescue will require a hydrant for this site.
Response: Fire department requires a fire hydrant on site
d. CDD Inspection Remarks:
i. All water lines, sewer lines, and fire lines from the main to the structure must have a visual
inspection performed by the building department.
Response: Note added to sheet C6.0.
All roof drains shall discharge in a manner not to cause a public nuisance and not over
sidewalks.
Response: All roof drains connect directly to underground storm sewer.
Page 3 of 9
iii. Sheet C7.0, handicapped parking signage is not in conformance with Virginia standards.
Correct to provide the proper wording.
Response: Signage revised. See sheet C7.0
iv. Add a detailed accessible parking space diagram to plans.
Response: Added to Sheet 7.0
Department of Community Development Comments
1. A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
Response: Site plan meets all requirements of section 32.6
2. [32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(a), & 4.201 Revise the setback in to address the following: Revise the setback
description and linework to fully, consistently and correctly specify the setback requirements.
Address the following:
a. Show all required setbacks and ensure what is listed on the coversheet and what is shown
on the site plan are consistent. The setback for Gander Drive is shown differently on the
plan views than is specified on the cover sheet.
Response: 10' minimum setback lines and 30' building setback line from the plat have
been provided and shown on plans, per comment. (Maximum setback lines not shown as
parcel abuts arterial highway and maximum setbacks do not apply). Cover sheet revised
for consistency with plan and zoning ordinance.
b. Revise the front setback to include the wording about when the sidewalk is outside of the ROW.
Response: Wording included, per comment.
c. Revise the front setback to specify that the front setback applies to both Route 29 & Gander
Drive, since Gander Drive is a private street.
Response: Revised, per comment.
d. Please note that since this parcel is on Route 29 the maximum front building setback does
not apply to this site plan.
Response: Maximum setback lines not shown as parcel abuts arterial highway and
maximum setbacks do not apply. Also noted on Property Data on cover sheet.
Show the location of the existing sidewalk along Route 29. Whether the sidewalk is within or
outside of the right- of -way impacts where the setback is measured from.
Response: Sidewalk is shown and within right of way. See coded note #6 on sheet C2.0.
Setback is measured from right of way/property line.
f. The front setback for Gander Drive should be measured from the edge of the private street
easement, and not the parcel line. Ensure that the setback lines are shown in the correct
location and clearly labeled for both front setbacks. See the comment on easements about
clearly delineating the private street easement.
Response: Setback revised to measure from private street easement.
g. Provide a pedestrian connection from the parcel to the sidewalk along Route 29. In the
approved site plan SDP2006-61 this sidewalk was shown between the subject parcel
and the bank parcel, in order to provide pedestrian access from both parcels.
Page 4 of 9
Rev. 1: This comment is being revised to the following: Provide a pedestrian
connection from the parcel to the sidewalk along Route 29 and across the parcel to the
existing sidewalk along Gander drive. In the approved site plan SDP2006-61 this
sidewalk was shown between the subject parcel and the bank parcel and along the
Gander Drive frontage, in order to provide pedestrian access from both parcels and to
the rest of the development. This is the only pedestrian connection between the
Northtown development and Route 29, was approved on previous site plans, and was
mentioned in the staff report for the approval of the Special Use Permit for the bank.
Depending on the location of the pedestrian path a crosswalk may be required for a
portion of it
Response: Pedestrian connection from Route 29 to Gander Drive provided.
3. [32.5.2(a)] Revise the following general information on the site plan:
a. Specify the Source of Topography. If it is the same as the source of survey, please specify that
in the same area on the cover sheet. Some site plans have different sources for the survey and
topography.
Response: Source of topography provided on cover sheet under benchmark information.
b. Shown the departing lot lines for all of the adjoining lots.
Response: Departing lot lines shown on plan, per comment.
c. Please include on the coversheet "Sheet List Table" a "Total Number of Sheets" at the bottom of the
table.
Response: Total Sheets added to Sheet List, per comment.
d. Include in the Zoning area of the cover sheet the Entrance Corridor overlay district and the
Airport Impact overlay in the "Zoning:" portion of the Property Data.
Response: Added overlay areas to "Additional Zoning Overlay" to Property Data information
on cover sheet.
4. [32.5.2(b) &32.5.2(n)] Information regarding the proposed use; Existing and proposed
improvements. Revise the following information on the proposed use on the site plan:
a. In reference to parking:
i. Revise the Property Data to specify the total area of the building, including any
other floors. A basement was specified on the application and a total building area
of 3,776 sq ft.
Response: Property Data revised, per comment.
Ensure the total sqft of the building is used in the parking calculation and not just the
building footprint.
Response: Parking calculation for automobile service station used and is not based
on area of building. See comment below.
iii. Provide a required parking calculation on the cover sheet in the Parking Calculation
area. This should show the specific category of parking calculation being used and
show the calculation itself and not just the outcome of the calculation. It appears that
the shopping center calculation, used on the approved SDP2006- 61 final site plan, is
being utilized but not the full size of the building is additional floors areproposed.
Initial:
Page 5 of 9
Rev. 1: Comment still valid. Address the comment. However, note that either the
previously approved shopping center parking calculation or the automobile service
station calculation would be acceptable in these circumstances.
Response: Parking calculation for automobile service station used and equation is
shown under "Parking Calculation" on cover sheet.
iv. Include a separate calculation, updating the Phase I overall parking, and ensure that
the removal of the parking along Gander Drive will not put the provided parking for all
of Phase I below what will be required when factoring in this site plan.
Response: Phase I Overall Parking table provided on cover sheet to show existing
and revised parking calculations.
b. The maximum amount of area of impervious cover. The percentage was provided but not the area.
Response: Land Cover revised to show area and percentages
5. [32.5.2(h)] Floodplain and related information. Revise the foodplain note to include the FEMA map number
and date.
Response: Map number and effective date provided on cover sheet, per comment.
6. [32.5.2(i)] Revise the following in reference to streets, easements and travelways:
a. An access easement is specified on sheet C3.0. Include the deed book and page number of
this recorded document and easement.
Response: Revised leader to reference the Maintenance Use and Easement Agreement
attached with this submittal.
The existing conditions sheet shows that the parking for the adjoining bank parcel is going
into the subject parcel. Show any existing easement that exists or show a proposed
easement. Any proposed easement will require a separate easement plat submission
(separate application and fee) and the easement plat must be approved prior to final site plan
approval.
Rev. 1: Comment still valid. Address the comment. However, if an existing agreement
addresses shared access, parking and maintenance of the parking and improvements that
cross the parcel boundary then submit it with the final site plan. County review of the legal
document will be required in order to ascertain if the existing agreement covers all
requirements for these circumstances
Response: The Maintenance Use and Easement Agreement attached with this submittal.
c. Although the Gander Drive access easement is a variable width easement, add a label
specifying that and dimension its width directly in front of this parcel. See significance of
this private street easement line in the comments on setback.
Response: Gander Drive access easement, label, and dimension in front of parcel have
been provided, per comment.
d. There is a 3-4' wide planting area, next to 4 parking spaces, but 10' away from the Gander
Drive travelway. Although the parking cannot be extended closer to the private street
easement, because of setback requirements, the island should be extended to the edge of
the travelway to allow for a larger landscape area (for trees and shrubs) and to avoid
confusion with access between the areas within the site and Gander Drive.
Page 6 of 9
Response: Planting area widened, per comment
7. [32.5.20)] Revise to show and label the existing stormwater management drainage easement(s) for the
whole parcel.
Response: Existing stormwater management drainage easement provided, per comment
[32.5.2(k) & 32.5.2(1)]] Private & public easements; Existing and proposed utilities. Address the following:
a. If any offsite easements will be required, provide their location and dimension.
Response: Proposed water easements provided. See Sheet C6.0.
Since the existing water line in Gander Drive has a portion of water line from the right of way
to the water meter that does not appear to be in an existing ACSA easement shown on the
existing conditions sheet, show any other existing easement for that portion of the that
connection or show any proposed easements.
Response: Provided easement that encloses existing water service. See Sheet C6.0
c. If any easements are required an easement plat must be submitted (separate application,
fee and submission) and approved prior to the approval of the final site plan.
Response: Noted for future action. Please provide information on any other utilities the
county would desire for utilities
[32.5.2(m)] Ingress and egress. Provide the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street
intersection(s).
Response: Provided on sheet C3.0, per comment
10. [32.5.2.(e), 32.5.2.(p) & 32.6.20)] Landscape plan. A landscape plan is required in the final site plan
that complies with section 32.7.9. A landscape plan was submitted but requires additional
information for the final site plan. Such information should include, but is not limited to, the
following:
a. Revise all landscaping calculations to be based on the whole parcel and not just the leasable area.
Response: Survey didn't pick up anything beyond the Lease area into the area south. I placed the
trees, etc shown on the previously approved plan, but since not sure if they are all still there (or
originally installed) I didn't run the entire parcel 10% coverage.
b. Revise the canopy calculation to include only landscaping in the area used in the calculation.
If only the leasable are is used for the calculation (based upon 32.7.9.8(c) & 4.7(c)(1)) then
only landscaping in that area can be used to meet the requirement.
Response: Tree Canopy calculation ONLY for the Lease Area.
c. Revise all notes and calculations to not include what appears to be references to codes for
other municipalities (ex. Section 34-870).
Response: Corrected, per comment
d. Revise the note about the definition of a parking lot. Parking lots are defined as those
containing 5 or more spaces. Revise landscape plan as appropriate.
Response: Corrected, per comment
Page 7 of 9
e. Revise the landscape plan to include a calculation for the maximum amount of paved parking
and other vehicular circulation area for use in the calculation mentioned below.
Response: Corrected, per comment
f. Provide the calculations for planting beds in the parking area being the equivalent area
of 5% of paved and vehicular circulation area,1 large or medium shade tree per 10
parking spaces, and ensure that the minimum requirements are met.
Response: Completed as shown on drawing
Ensure that all previously approved planting within the parcel are shown as either existing or
proposed (if missing) or specify alternative plantings that would need approval of planning and
engineering.
i. One of the previously approved street trees on Route 29 (SDP2006-61) appears to no
longer exist. Revise the landscape plan to show this missing tree being replaced.
Additional trees were shown as part of the rain garden (see below) and additional
trees may be required by ARB. Refer to the ARB comments once they are provided to
you (see comment below on ARB conditions of approval).
Response: Missing street tree added.
ii. On the previously approved site plan (SDP2006-61) there are rain garden plantings
between Route 29 and the leasable area (Rain Garden #3). The bond for this
raingarden has not been released, but the plantings should be shown on this site plan
since they are part of the development requirements for this development and lot.
Response: Raingarden #3 added to plans.
iii. On the previously approved site plan (SDP2014-34) there are stormwater
management/biofilter plantings on the south side of the parcel (labeled as Biofilter #1
in SDP2006-61 when originally approved). This Biofilter is not planted according to the
previously approved plans. Revise the landscape plan to show this required
landscaping. The Water Resource department has stated that they have requested that
the owner plant the required vegetation.
Response: Bio-filter #1 added to plans
h. Revise the existing conditions sheet to include the required information on the existing trees.
Response: Existing trees labeled, per comment.
i. Include in the site plan a filled out, signed and dated conservation checklist.
Response: Corrected, per comment.
j. Include in the existing conditions, grading and landscape sheets tree protection fencing
around all existing trees and required landscaping that is to remain and include tree
protection fencing details in the site plan.
Response: Completed as shown on drawing.
k. Provided a detail of the screening wall around the dumpster location.
Response: Dumpster Enclosure plan attached to this submittal.
Once additional landscaping is shown on the site plan, based upon the comments above
Initial:
Page 8 of 9
and ARB comments, ensure that the screening extends sufficiently to block the view of
the service bays from the publicstreet.
Response: Completed as shown on drawing.
m. Revise the scale of the landscape plan to use the same type of scale (engineering) as the
other sheets of the site plan.
Response: Corrected, per comment
11. [32.5.2(n) & 32.6.2(k)] Outdoor lighting. In reference to the photometric plan address the following:
a. Revise the Luminaire Schedule to have LLF value for all fixtures and update the table accordingly.
Response: LLF values were revised for all pole mounted fixtures, per comment. Refer to luminaire
schedule for details.
Revise the Luminaire Schedule to have values for the total lamp lumens.
Response: Revised, per comment.
c. Ensure that the all product numbers in the "Description" can be found in the manufacturer
cutsheets provided in the site plan, including the "ELS-EAL-ABL-BLCK".
Response: "ELS-EAL-ABL-BLCK" references the addition of a back -shield on the
respective pole fixture; this has been noted on the photometric plan. Please note the pole
fixture cut sheet only refers to the pole fixture, not accessories.
12. [Comment] The leasable area of the site has heavy linework and is bearing and distances. Since it
is labeled as the leasable area, and not a new subdivision of the parcel, no comments on a
subdivision have been provided. If subdivision will be proposed additional comments may be
required prior to final site plan approval.
Response: No subdivision is proposed.
13. [Comment] ARB comments are not available at this time. Because of COVID19's impact on public
meetings the ARB comments will be provided when they become available. The final site plan
approval will not be granted until ARB has approved the site plan.
Response: Addressed ARB comments. See attached ARB Comment Response Letter
14. [Comment] See the SRC comments from most of the reviewers attached. All SRC reviewer comments must
be sufficiently address prior to final site plan approval
Response: Comments addressed
Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions as to how the comments have been addressed.
Kelly Schwieterman, P.E.
Project Manager
Office: 937.401.3413
schwieterman@cesoinc.com
Attachments:
1. Dumpster Enclosure Plan Sheet
2. Fire Flow Test
Page 9 of 9
ISO NFF Calculation
4. Northtown - Maintenance Use and Easement Agreement
5. ARB Comment Response Letter.
PRECAST CONC. TOP CAP
SEALANT AND BACKER ROD
TOP OF MASONRY
LINE OF TOP CAP BEYOND
DOME CONC. TOP
5" STEEL GATE POST - SEE DTL 2/A-10
3
A-10
T'x1/8" STL. STRIP CLOSURE
PLATE. CORRUGATED DECK
NOT SHOWN. SEE 3/A10
2"x2"0/16" TS FRAME
Qo
3 1/2" THICK EIFS TO
CONT. 8" BOND COURSE W/ (1) #5 BAR
HINGE SEE DETAIL 7/A-10
MATCH BLDG. (ABOVE
- GROUT SOLID
T'x1/8" STL. STRIP CLOSURE
WAINE
T)
PLATE. CORRUGATED DECK
NOTE: UPPER MOST COLLAR MAY BE
NOT SHOWN. SEE 3/A10
DELETED SO THAT GATE IS REMOVABLE
J
1/2" EXTERIOR
IN FUTURE. VERIFY WITH OWNER.
GRADE SHEATHING
8" CMU WALL W/ HORIZ. JOINT REINF.
AT 16" O.C. VERT. AND #6 BARS AT
FLASHING AND ;t
ENDS, CORNERS & 2'4' O.C. BTWN.
DRAINAGE PER EIFS
GROUT BLOCK SOLID AT REINF. SEE
5"0 SCHEDULE 40 PIPE. SEE DTL.
2"x2"0/16" TS
MANUFACTURERS
PLAN FOR LOCATIONS.
6/A-10 FOR SIMILAR CONSTRUCTION
HORIZONTAL
REQUIREMENTS
RAIL
En
°?
GATE SEE DTL 2/A-10
Qo
CONT. STONE
6" 0 PIPE BOLLARD - SEE DTL. 6/A-10.
WAINSCOT SILL TO
MATCH BUILDING
HINGE SEE DETAIL 7/A-10
BRICK WAINSCOT TO
2" STL. FLAT BAR
MATCH BLDG. (TYP.
BRACES WELDED TO
6" CONC. SLAB W/ 6x6 W2.9xW2.9 WWF
DOME TOP OF CONC.
FRAME
77
ON COMPACTED 6" CRUSHED STONE171
FOOTING (1")
N
1/2" EXPANSION JOINT W/ URETHANE
8 SEALANT
A-10
LL
+1
1° ha d a °b 8a ° m
#6 DOWELS @ EA.
VERT. REINFORCED
CELL \ \\
CD
101, 5 X X
n,1\\\\\�` I mW I
0
Lu \ 12" CMU - GROUT ALL CELLS SOLID I I I
J \ ° \\\ BELOW GRADE O
• • a
•<° CONC. FOOTING W/ 4-#5'S CONT. T&B I I I
L — J
\ \ \ \ \ / / #4'S @ 12" O.C. I i� STL. POST & FOUNDATION (TYP.)
If I
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ L-----J L
1 SECTION rn) TRASH ENCLOSURE
-10SCALE: 3/4" = 1' — 0"
17'-4"
22 GA. GALV. B DECK
1"
8'-3" 8'-3"
UAIVG OULIJ OL LVI.NIVV ULVIUL VV/ VLRIILAL nULV
TO PREVENT BOLTS FROM DRAGGING ON CONCRETE
DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE FRONT ELEVATION
SCALE: 1 /2" = 1' — 0"
<0 • d • d • • • °
• ° •
4 a 4 d
4 ° d °
°
d 4
• d d °
d
d °
° •
° d
° ° d d
•
4
NOTE:
GATES SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH DROP (CANE) BOLTS, HEAVY DUTY HINGES AND
LATCHES (WITH PADLOCK) DRILL HOLES 2" DEEP IN CONC. / PAVING TO ALLOW
DROP BOLTS TO HOLD GATES IN CLOSED POSITION AND AT AN OPEN POSITION
OF 900. POSITION VERTICAL HOLD TO KEEP CANE BOLTS FROM DRAGGING CONC.
— BRICK
— CMU
i
5
A-10
STEEL GATES
AND GATE
POSTS PAINTED
"HOMESTEAD
BROWN". SEE
DETAIL 2/A-10
FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION
FINISHED
PAVING
L — -1
T-6" 0
FOOTING
NOTE: ALL EXTERIOR TRASH ENCLOSURE
STEEL SHALL BE GALVANIZED
TYP. DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE SIDE ELEVATION
A-10 SCALE: 1/2 of = 1' — 0"
s
A-10
iQ-_m
#6 REBARS AT EACH
END, EACH CORNER
& AT 24" O.C.
6" DIA. PIPE BOLLARD
SEE DTL. 6/A-10
EXTERIOR VENEER TO
MATCH BLDG.
6" CONC. SLAB W/
6"x6"W2.9XW2.9WWF
ON COMPACTED 6"
CRUSHED STONE
CONC. APRON TO MATCH
PAD CONSTRUCTION. SEE
CIVIL DWG'S FOR PAD
DIMENSIONS
1/2" EXP. JOINT W/
URETHANE SEALANT
EXTERIOR VENEER RETURN
TO MATCH BLDG.
5" CONC. FILLED GATE
POST. SEE 1/A-10
GATE TO SWING 180
DEGREES
DRILL HOLES IN CONC/
PAVEMENT FOR CANE
BOLTS. HOLES SHALL BE
PLACED TO HOLD GATES
IN CLOSED POSITION
AND AN OPEN POSITION
OF 90 DEGREES
TYP. AT ALL GATES
TOP OF PAVEMENT
T'x1/8" STL. STRIP CLOSURE
PLATE. CORRUGATED DECK
NOT SHOWN. SEE 3/A10
TRASH ENCLOSURE GATE DETAIL
SCALE: 3 /4" = 1' — 0"
3"x 1/8" STL. PLATE DECK
CLOSURE WELDED TO
FRAME ON THREE SIDES
(SEE ELEV.)
2"x 2"x 3/16" TS FRAME (TYP
OF 3 - SEE ELEV.)
TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM
FRAME
2"x 3/16" STL. PLATE
DIAGONAL STRAP BRACING
(SEE ELEVS.)
1 1/2" x 22 GA. GALV.
STL. B DECK
3 GATE SECTION
A-10
SCALE: 3" = 1'- 0"
5"0 CONC. FILLED SCHED. 40 PIPE
HINGE SLEEVE
1 1/2" x 22 GA. GALV. B DECK
Ctf
ROUND OVER TOP OF
CONCRETE
6" DIA. X GALVANIZED
z STEEL PIPE, SOLID IN ° w d d
,Lu CONCRETE. PRIME &
m G PAINT VALVOLINE RED. °
2 DOME TOP OF CONCRETE ° 2 x 3/16" DIAGONAL BRACE
o FOOTING (1") dd d WELDED TO FRAME
r 6"x2"A/4" PLATE WELDED TO
r, —
HINGE SLEEVE AND GATE FRAME
° PAVEMENT AS PLAN 2 x 2 x 3/16" TS FRAME
m ° ° NOTED ON VIEW GREASE FITTING
as °
CIVIL DRAWINGS
a & DETAILS
°
W \ ° d4 o 0
nnri-AST CONC. TOP CAP � \/ ° °
J Qn \\ �
r0 MATCH BLDG. ui
z \\
VE WAINSCOT) w °a
V ° d
M � °
°
o a T-6" OF PIPE BELOW
EEL GATE POST @ ° ° ° ° ° GRADE CENTER IN
CONCRETE
4 a 18" DIAMETER, 4000
PSI, AIR ENTRAINED
T. STONE WAINSCOT CONCRETE BASE
f0 MATCH BUILDIN \ a 8" COARSE STONE,
HAND COMPACTED
\ \ o 0 0 0 0 \ \
T TO H BLDG (\\\\ o
BLDG. (TYP.) \\ \\ \\ UNDISTURBED
OR COMPACTED
SUBGRADE
BOLLARD DETAIL
SCALE: 1" = 1' - 0"
rn
ELEVATION
VIEW
HINC)E DETAIL
A-10
SCALE: 3" = 1'- 0"
GREASE FITTING
6"x2"A/4" PLATE WELDED TO
HINGE SLEEVE AND GATE FRAME
HINGE SLEEVE
GATE FRAME
METAL PIPE COLLAR -
FIELD WELD TO POST
5"0 CONC. FILLED SCHED. 40 PIPE
NOTE: (2) HINGES REQUIRED PER
POST (TYP.) SEE DETAIL 2/A-10
DUMPSTER EXTERIOR FINISH NOTES
REFER ALSO TO "EXTERIOR FINISHES", SHEET A-3.
EIFS: MATCH BUILDING EIFS
BRICK: MATCH BUILDING BRICK
MORTAR: MATCH BUILDING MORTAR
COPING: PRECAST LIMESTONE CAP. COLOR TO MATCH BUILDING
STONE WAINSCOT
SEALER: ALL BRICK SURFACES SHALL BE TREATED W/ SEALER.
REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS.
BOLLARDS / GUARD POSTS:
FIELD PAINT w/SHERWIN-WILLIAMS B66-310 PRO-CYRL
PRIMER FOLLOWED BY (2) FINISH COATS OF B66-300
SHER-CYRL HPA. COLOR SHALL BE "VALVOLINE RED".
GATES & GATE POSTS:
FIELD PAINT w/SHERWIN-WILLIAMS B66-310 PRO-CYRL
PRIMER FOLLOWED BY (2) FINISH COATS OF SHERWIN
WILLIAMS 7515 HOMESTEAD BROWN. SEMI -GLOSS DTM
ACRYLIC B66-200.
CESO
WWW.CESOINC.COM
175 MONTROSE WEST AVE., SUITE 400, AKRON, OH 44321
PHONE: (330) 665-0660 FAX: (888) 208-4826
IIIIIIIoI�I
2
w
w
w
z
O
T�
VJ
N
w
zw
Q J
= J
U>
J LLJ
O�
z0
Q _J
Q
z _
wU
z_
J
O0�
Q C)
> w
0
z
fQ
V
2020 CESO, INC
0
E
0
0
z
Project No. 757280-01
Scale AS NOTED
Drawn CESO
Checked J S B
Date 02.19.20
Drawing Title
DUMPSTER
ENCLOSURE
FOOTING DETAIL
SCALE: 1 " = 1' — 0"
DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE PLAN
SCALE: 1 /4" = 1' — 0"
Drawing No. A-10
c— con
Au�l�rity
Hydrant Flow
Date of Report
Service
Y
4/25/2017
Test Report
16p +T9�Dr,---LINIMBRIIP. wr Y1911 113f19R-1511
Location Gander Mtn
Date and Time of Test 4/25/2017 9:07:00 AM
Minutes of Flow 2
Pipe Size (Inches) 8
Pressure Hydrant 12618
Static Pressure (psi)
77
Residual Pressure (psi)
64
Flow Hydrant #1 12628
Pitot Pressure #1(psi) 55 Test Flow 1
1036
Flow Hydrant #2
Pitot Pressure #2 (psi) Test Flow 2
0
Flow Hydrant #3
Pitot Pressure #3 (psi) Test Flow 3
0
Total Estimated Flow (gpm) 1036
AW WA Q20 Calculation (gpm) 2303
(Value of zero In Q20 indicates insufficient pressure drop for calculation)
Comments
Hydrant opened all the way.
For method of calculating pitot flow with a diffuser: see eq. 13, Walski and Lutes article 1990 Journal Management and Operations AW WA
(All tests conducted using 2.5 discharge outlet unless otherwise specified)
Estimated Consumption (gal) 2072
For use for water audit
Signature of Tester: 14vi VIZ-
a
a
E
F
Egg
hunt
jgg;$(
\ b�NNiK,gs
�$$E$mtly3€g�
i�"a a8 €.SSBQ€8h
ISO Needed Fire Flow Calculation
Proposed Valvoline Instant Oil Change
Charlottesville, VA
1-story VIOC (w/ basement)
Wood Frame w/ Masonry Exterior
Auto Repair Shop `n
No exposures or communication
67 ft
Construction Type
Construction Class 1 (Frame)
Construction Type Coefficient (F) = 1
Effective Area (A) = 2,080 sf
C =18F-VA--
C = 18(1.5) 2080
C = 1,231.38
C = 1,250 gpm
Occupancy Type
Auto Repair Shop
Limited Combustible Class C-2
Occupancy Factor (0) = 0.85
Exposures and Communication
None
Exposure and Communication Factor (X+P) = 0.00
Needed Fire Flow
NFF = (C)(0)(1+(X+P))
NFF = (1,250)(0.85)(1+0.00)
NFF = 1062
NFF = 1000 gpm
3601 Rigby Road,
Suite 300
Miamisburg, OH 45342
www.cesoinc.com
6/10/2020
Department of Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
RE: ARB-2020-34: Valvoline (TMP: 04500-00-00-111 CO)
Valvoline Instant Oil Change
Dear Mr. Khris Taggart,
We received your emailed plan review comments dated 4/23/2020 and offer the following responses.
ARB Final Checklist
1. Rearrange brick and EIFs to accentuate the key architectural elements of the building.
Response: Added thin brick veneer at each corner post of the tower.
2. Indicate in the architectural drawings the materials to be utilized in the overhead door.
Response: Added "Pre -finished Aluminum metal" note to exterior elevations.
3. Revise the north elevation to incorporate additional design details to relieve "blankness".
Response: Added EIFS rectangle 9'-4"(w) x 5'-3"(t) accent to North side
4. Revise the design to better coordinate the window on the south elevation with the
Response: We added same similar EIFS Accent 5'-10"(w) x 5'-3"(t) as north side to south side. Extended
storefront glazing to finish floor
5. Provide specifications on the proposed window glass. Provide samples, if tinted window glass is proposed.
Response:1" insulating glass complying ASTM E774. Not tinting is proposed
6. Revise the building elevations to show the gas meter along the rear elevation.
Response: Gas meter has been relocated to rear of building.
7. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to the site and architectural plans
Response: Will add this to Permit set.
8. Revise the pole -mounted fixtures to soft, warm white (3k).
Response: Will add this to Permit set.
Include a note on the lighting plan indicating that the 20' maximum height of the pole -mounted
light fixtures includes any base.
Response: Note provided on luminaire schedule.
10. Revise the lighting plan to include cut sheets for all wall lights.
Response: The Lighting Plan only provides modeling for the wallpack and pole -mounted fixtures for they
produce significant light when "on". The secondary "lights" seen just above each entrance/exit doorway
are remote emergency fixtures for security purposes only. These fixtures are only on in case of
emergency and yield hardly any light when in use. Thus, they are not modeled for lighting plan purposes.
A cut sheet for these emergency fixtures has been provided for reference as an attachment in the
resubmittal package. However, the cut sheet has not been added to the lighting plan to ensure clarity, for
it is not modeled or shown.
11. Revise lights with an LLF (maintenance factor) of less than 1.0 to 1.0.
Response: The LLF has been revised to be 1.0, per comment
12. Add the standard lighting note to the lighting plan.
Response: Note added to lighting plan.
13. Revise the landscape plan to show interspersed ornamentals trees along the EC.
Response: Additional ornamental trees added along the EC.
14. Revise the landscape plan to include additional planting in the gap along the western
perimeter of the paved area.
Response: Additional evergreen screening shrubs added to fill in the gap.
15. Revise he landscape plan to show large shade trees at 40'on center and 2.5" caliper along
the northern perimeter of the parking area.
Response: Parcel layout, ponds, and lease space have constrained the room we have to work with. As a
result, there is only a 2 foot space between our curb and the existing curb of the bank. A 2.5" cal. tree
rootball will not fit within that space.
An alternative landscape plan for this area is proposed using understory trees at 18' on center along with
a continuous dwarf 24-30" mature with evergreen hedge.
16. Revise the caliper of the proposed interior and perimeter parking trees to the required
2.5".
Response: Sizes adjusted to 2.5" cal., except understory ornamental trees.
17. Revise the landscaping proposed to shrubs that are at least 24" in height.
Response: Plant sizes adjusted to 24" height, except the north edge screening shrubs. MATURE height of
these dwarf boxwood is only 24" height. These shrubs have an installed height of 18"+/-, placed at 30"
0C.
18. Add the standard landscaping note to the landscape plan.
Response: Added, per comment
19. Show existing trees on the existing conditions plan.
Response: Existing trees shown and labeled.
20. Revise he landscape Show areas designated for preservation on the site plan. Maintain grading outside the
driplines of trees to remain. Show tree protection fencing on and coordinated throughout
the grading, landscaping, and erosion and sediment control plans.
Response: Completed as shown on drawings.
21. Revise the Note for future sign submittals that sign applications are required for all proposed signs.
Eliminate cabinet style signs or limit them to secondary signs. All cabinet type signs must
have opaque backgrounds. Reduce the number of colors used in the sign to be no more
than three (including white). Eliminate overly intense colors from the sign proposal.
(Note that signs associated with this use may be subject to the Northtown Center
Comprehensive Sign Plan).
Response: Sign under separate permit and cover
If there are any questions or concerns, please contact me at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Jaime Garrett
Project Manager
cEso40
iaime.garrett@cesoinc.com
www.cesoinc.com
Akron I Bentonville I Columbus I Dayton I Lansing I Nashville I Orlando I Phoenix I Pittsburgh
3