No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202100003 Review Comments Initial Site Plan 2021-02-22�y OF 8J; � tw hRGINt* COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fox (434) 972-4126 February 22, 2021 Scott Collins, P.E. Collins Engineering 200 Garrett Street, Suite K Charlottesville, VA 22902 scott&collins-en ing eering com RE: SDP202100003 Avon Court Industrial Building — Initial Site Plan Dear Mr. Collins: The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Initial comments from the following divisions of the Department of Community Development and other agencies, as applicable, are attached: Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) Albemarle County Architectural Review Board (ARB) Albemarle County Information Services (E911) Albemarle County Building Inspections Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue Albemarle County Service Authority Virginia Department of Transportation Virginia Department of Health Comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed, and should not be considered final. However, the Site Review Committee has attempted to identify all issues that will be required to be resolved prior to Final Site Plan approval. The applicant shall request the project be deferred to allow required revisions if required. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, N`iw Cameron Langille Senior Planner II Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) — Cameron Langille, blangille@albemarle.org — Required changes prior to initial site plan approval: 1. [32.5.2 (d)] The plan identifies the limits of Preserved Steep Slopes based on Albemarle County GIS. But it labels some portions of the Preserved Steep Slopes as "Managed Steep Slopes based on field run topo elevations." Section 18-30.7.4 (b)(1)(h) states that areas of Preserved Steep Slopes may be reclassified to Managed Steep Slopes as follows: "Slopes less than 25 percent based on new topographic information. Any use or structure allowed by right or by special use permit in the underlying district, provided that the owner submits new topographic information that is based on more accurate or better technical data demonstrating, to the satisfaction of the county engineer, that the slopes are less than 25 percent." a. Please Seen Engineering comments #2a-2c, and #4a-4i. In order for the Preserved Steep Slopes to be reclassified and treated as Managed Steep Slopes, the applicant must submit field -run topography prepared by a licensed engineer, surveyor or landscape architect demonstrating that the lands to be removed from the district do not contain slopes of 25 percent or greater. The County Engineer must review and approve of the field run topography. Otherwise, a Zoning Map Amendment must be approved by the Board of Supervisors in accordance to reclassify the slopes to Managed Steep Slopes. Required changes prior to final site plan approval: 2. [32.5.1 (c)] Please label the front setback on the site layout drawings so that it states " 10' front setback." 3. [32.5.1 (c)] Please provide dimensions for the proposed structure. 4. [32.5.2 (a)] Revise the Zoning Note on Sheet 1 so that it states "EC" as the abbreviation for the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. It is currently abbreviated as "ARB." a. Please clarify the zoning note so that it states that portions of the property are within the Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes Overlay District. 5. [32.5.2 (b)] Please clarify the proposed use note on Sheet 1. Per LOD202000014, the primary use of this site will be "Manufacturing/processing/assembly/fabrication/recycling." a. LOD202000014 also states that "Subordinate retail for any use permitted by -right are also permitted by -right in the LI district, provided that the use does not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of the industrial use." Please clarify the proposed 4,662 sq. ft. of space open to the public. Is this intended to be subordinate retail use associated with the primary use? 6. [32.5.2 (d)] Please provide spot elevations where identified by the attached Engineering comments. 7. [32.5.2(e)] Identify the types and sizes of the existing landscape features as described in section 32.7.9.4(c). 8. [32.5.2(e)] On the existing conditions and landscaping sheets, provide labels identifying whether the existing wooded areas are composed of evergreen, deciduous or a mix of types of trees. 9. [32.5.2 (h)] Please see Engineering comment # 1. Revise effective date of FEMA floodplain panel as specified by Engineering. 10. [32.5.2 (i)] Please provide one-way signage/striping along all Trailways measuring less than 20' in width. See Engineering comments for further information. 11. [32.5.2 (k)] Please update labels for all proposed water, sewer, drainage, and stormwater easements on the final site plan and state the easement type and width. a. Prior to final site plan approval, an Easement Plat Application must be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded. Once recorded, the final site plan will need to be updated so that all new easement labels indicate the recorded instrument number of the plat (deed book and page). 12. [32.5.2 0)] Please show and label all existing water, sewer, and drainage easement on the property. State the easement type (e.g. ACSA water easement), the easement dimensions, and the recorded instrument (deed book/page) for each existing easement in the easement labels. 13. [32.5.2 (1)] Please show and label all existing utility easements on the property. State the easement type, dimensions, and the recorded instrument (deed book/page) for each existing easement in the easement labels. 14. [32.5.2 (n)] There are several rows of parking spaces that are dimensioned as 9' width x 16' length along 24' wide travel ways. Section 18-4.12.16 (c)(6) allows for the minimum length requirement to be reduced by up to 2' provided that there is adequate space for a 2' unobstructed overhang at the end of these spaces. The plans do not identify whether there is adequate space for the 2' overhang. Please provide additional information on the areas in front of these spaces, otherwise, revise the dimensions so that each space is a minimum of 18' in length. 15. [32.5.2 (n)] Prior to final site plan approval, please identify the screening measures around the proposed dumpster. Per Section 18-4.12.19, dumpsters shall be screened in accordance with Section 32.7.9 and 30.7.6. If a constructed screen will be provided, provide a plan and profile construction detail of the enclosure that identifies the materials, dimensions, etc. If landscaping will be provided, identify this on the landscaping plan. 16. [32.5.2 (n)] Please connect the proposed sidewalks along Avon Court to the internal sidewalks at the southeast side of the building/southeast parking area. It appears there is adequate spacing to provide sidewalks along both sides of the easternmost vehicular entrance into the site. 17. [32.5.2 (t)] Please see the attached correspondence from the Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation (DCR) regarding the Dam Break Inundation Zone. No further revisions are needed to the plan in relation to the DBIZ based on DCR comments. 18. [32.6] The final site plan must comply with all applicable requirements of Section 32.6 prior to approval. 19. [General comment] Prior to final site plan approval, a Water Protection Ordinance (WPO) application must be submitted, reviewed, and approved. 20. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.2.11 The proposed entrances shall be designed and constructed as required by the standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. VDOT approval of the proposed entrances to the site shall be required prior to final site plan approval. 21. [32.5.2(n)] Any proposed outdoor lighting must be shown on the site plan. A photometric plan and lighting cut sheets must be provided with the final site plan. Proposed lighting must comply with requirements of Sections 32.7.8 & Section 4.17 of the Zoning Ordinance. a. [4.17.4] Provide a luminaire schedule identifying each type of outdoor luminaire proposed. Include the manufacturer name, model number, lamp type (e.g. LED, incandescent, etc.), wattage/lumens emitted, and pole/mounting height. Include a column in the schedule that identifies the symbology used for each fixture on the lighting plan. State the number of each outdoor luminaire provided by type. b. [4.17.4] Provide manufacturer cut -sheets for all outdoor luminaires that will emit 3,000 lumens or greater. Be sure that the cut -sheets identify that these luminaires will be equipped with full -cutoff fixtures. c. [4.17.4] Provide a table with photometric data for each luminaire type. Please be aware that Albemarle County requires photometric plans to use a Light Loss Factor (LLF) of 1.0 to calculate footcandle measurements on site plans. d. [4.17.4 (b)(1)] Footcandle measurements at property lines along roads or properties within residential zoning districts cannot exceed 0.5 footcandles. Currently, footcandle measurements provided exceed 0.5 footcandles adjacent to the PUD district at the southeast property line. Footcandles measurements along Avon Court are not provided. Please update the lighting plan as necessary. e. [4.17.4 (b)(2)] Add a note to the lighting plan stating "All outdoor lighting, regardless of the amount of lumens, shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads." f [4.17.4 (b)(1)] Add a note to the lighting plan stating "The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one-half foot candle." g. [4.17.4 (a)] Add a note to the lighting plan stating "All outdoor luminaries emitting 3,000 lumens or greater shall be equipped with a full -cutoff fixture." 22. [32.7.91 Please provide a landscaping plan that complies with all requirements of Section 32.7.9 on the final site plan. This includes the following: a. Provide a landscape schedule identifying the species name, common name, caliper and height at time of installation, and amount of each shrub and tree provided for required landscaping. Include a column in the schedule that identifies the abbreviation/symbology used to identify each landscaping material. b. [32.7.9.4 (c)] Existing landscape features as described in this Code section. c. [32.7.9.51 Street trees 50 feet on center along Avon Court. d. [32.7.9.61 Minimum 5% of overall parking area landscaping, including one tree per every 10 parking spaces proposed. Please provide a calculation on the landscaping plan identifying the percentage and sq. ft. of required and proposed parking area landscaping. e. [32.7.9.7 (d)] The parking area at the southeast corner of the site is adjacent to a residential zoning district and therefore must be screened. Planting strips required for screening must measure a minimum of 20' in depth. Please revise the landscaping plan so that the landscaping strip is a minimum of 20' wide, and must feature a double -staggered row of evergreen trees planted 15 feet on center, or a double staggered row of evergreen shrubs planted ten feet on center, or an alternative vegetative screening approved by the agent. f [32.7.9.8] Minimum total landscaping canopy for the site area. 10% of the site must be canopy area. Site area is calculated as described in Section 32.7.9.8 (c). Please provide a calculation on the landscaping plan identifying the percentage and sq. ft. of required and proposed canopy area. g. All proposed landscaping must be species identified on the Albemarle County Approved Plants List. h. Canopy areas for specific tree and shrub species can be obtained from the Plant Canopy Calculations table. Please contact Cameron Langille at the Department of Community Development at blanig Ile@albemarle.org or 296- 5832 ext. 3432 for further information. Comments from Other Reviewers: Albemarle County Architectural Review (ARB) — Margaret Maliszewski, mmaliszewski@albemarle.org — No objection, see attached. Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — John Anderson, janderson2@albemarle.org — Requested changes, see attached. Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — Brian Becker, bbecker@albemarle.org — No objection, see attached. Albemarle County Building Inspections — Betty Slough, bsloug_h(a albemarle.org— Requested changes, see attached. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — Howard Lagomarsino, hlaeomarsino@albemarle.org — Requested changes, see attached. Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) — Richard Nelson, rnelson@serviceauthority.org — See attached recommendation. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) — Doug McAvoy Jr., douglas.mcavoy@vdot.vir ig nia.gov — Requested changes, see attached. Virginia Department of Health (VDH) — Alan Mazurowski, alan.mazurowski@vdh.vir ig nia.gov - No objection, see attached. Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation (DCR) — Justin Deel, iustin.deel@dcr.virginia.gov — No objection, see attached. Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority (RWSA) — Dyon Vega, dvega&rivanna.org— Requested changes, see attached. Review Comments for SDP202100003 Initial Site Plan Project Name: AVON COURT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING - INITIAL - DIGFFAL Date Completed: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 Depanment/DivisiordAgency: Review Status: Reviewer: Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB No Objection Pager County of Albemarle Printed On: 02/22/2021 � AI ?"h �IRGRTF COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 Site Plan review Project: Avon Court Industrial Building - ISP Project file number: SDP2021-00003 Plan preparer: Scott Collins, Collins Engineering [200 Garrett St., Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902, scott(a)collins-engineering.coml Owner or rep.: Avon Court Holdings, LLC, P.O. Box 1467, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Riverhead Development, 455 2"d Street SE, Suite 200 Charlottesville, VA 22902 lsimoson(d�riverbenddev.com alan(ariverbenddev.com ] Plan received date: 11 Jan 2021 Date of comments: 10 Feb 2021 Reviewer: John Anderson Project Coordinator: Cameron Langille Please address comments below with the Final Site Plan (FSP) 1. C-1 a. Floodplain Information: Please revise Eff date to May 16, 2016 consistent with 18-30.3.2. b. Recommend SWM Note reference WPO2021-00002 ()WPO plan is under review). 2. Sheet 2 a. Legend assumes a reclassification that is not automatic, or complete. See 18-30.7.6, Amendment of district boundaries specifies whether/how steep slopes (preserved /managed) may be removed from the steep slopes district. ISP assumes approval, prior to approval. Revise FSP and development design consistent with existing steep slopes. Alternatively, pursue process established by ordinance for removing steep slopes from the steep slopes overlay district. b. Revise legend, per review item 2.a. above. c. Provide circuit court deed bk.-pg. references for RW dedication /various easements. 3. Sheet 3 a. 13' site access on south side of industrial building does not meet min. 2-way access width (20'); portion of site access south of building is eligible for 1-wav access. Provide 1-way pavement marking, No Entry sign/s, 1-way travel signs, etc. [ 18-4.12.17.c.2.] b. 13' width on south side of building is inconsistent with Site Plan Note 5. please reconcile. c. Provide site access profile showing smooth transition, Avon Court, proposed -to -existing. d. Coordinate with VDOT to ensure state will accept portion of Avon Court proposed with ISP. (Coordinate since Avon Ct. at this location does not appear to serve at least 3 separate entities.) e. Coordinate 13' access width south of building with ACSA, to ensure adequate for fire rescue vehicles. f. Provide Avon Court typical road plan details: i. Profile, w / VC -tangent design data. ii. LD-204, LD-229. iii. Pavement section based on peak ADT. iv. Pavement design capable of supporting fire apparatus weighing 85,000 lb. (Note 5). v. (Remaining) Civil details. g. If industrial building will have security fence or entrance gates, recommend show on FSP. Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 5 h. No portion of retaining wall located on managed or preserved steep slopes may exceed 6' ht. Max. ht. of portions of retaining walls not on steep slopes is 10' (requirements at 18-4.3.3.A.1. provide TWBW elevations to aid review, especially for portions located on steep slopes. 4. Sheet 4 a. Wherever curb concentrates runoff, provide CG-6 (south of building, for example). b. Provide spot elevations to aid review and help ensure no nuisance ponding. c. Revise proposed grading on preserved steep slopes (highlight, below), since impermissible. d. e. f. g _ "MG 'N. SWERM BViEER IDPLAiN PRESERVED " SLWEs MOORE'S CREEK Note: More accurate field survey data showing slopes <25% may be used to prepare an Exhibit for review (to request removal of setions of slopes from steep slopes overlay district —also, item 2.a. above). Label managed steep slopes along north side of site /N PL, E and W of dry detention basin `A'. Label all slopes steeper than 3:1. At top of 8' wall at west end of site, provide GR-2 guardrail. Provide GR-2 behind curb along access on S side of building, since 14'(f) vertical interval to stream is unrecoverable. h. Provide GR-2 for blue -circle parking spaces: 5. 0 Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 5 ,� uMUX EWT.., ivHCK _ ----------- 100' UFFER iRGCCRIFl1 / / \ i. For inlet and pipe conveyance leading from cul-de-sac, Avon Ct. to dry detention basin `A', provide and label public drainage easement. Sheet 5 a. Tom on drainage layer (pipes /inlets) to aid review of potential landscape -drainage conflicts. b. Recommend Landscaping Plan identify groundcover species hardier than grass (not Lespedeza) for any proposed slopes steeper than 3:1. c. Additional comments possible. Sheet 7 a. Drainage Note 4: Revise sheet 4 proposed public drainage easements to extend from outfall of each SWM facility to `a natural watercourse.' b. Provide CG-6 wipe down detail. Engineering Review Comments Page 4 of 5 7. Sheet 8 a. Revise Water Quantity Summary Narrative to reference stormwater conveyance downstream of underground detention /dry detention basin. Although mapped floodplain does indicate limits of analysis for flood control [9VAC25-870-66.C.3.c.], at mapped floodplain on this site there is a pronounced 4' vertical drop, 360' to 356'. MS-19 requires measures to limit erosion impact/s to adjacent /offsite parcel/s (City of Charlottesville, in this instance). b. 9VAC25-840-40.19.a. applies to both underground detention and dry detention basin `A'. Excerpt: 19. Properties and waterways downstream from development sites shall be protected from sediment deposition, erosion and damage due to increases in volume, velocity and peak flow rate of stormwater runoff for the stated frequency storm of 24-hour duration in accordance with the following standards and criteria. Stream restoration and relocation projects that incorporate natural channel design concepts are not man- made channels and shall be exempt from any flow rate capacity and velocity requirements for natural or man- made channels: a. Concentrated stormwater runoff leaving a development site shall be discharged directly into an adequate natural or man-made receiving channel, pipe or storm sewer system. For those sites where runoff is discharged into a pipe or pipe system, downstream stability analyses at the outfall of the pipe or pipe system shall be performed. SWM analysis is thoughtful. Erosion analysis prompts request for adequate man-made receiving channel to such point erosion effects abate. Dry detention basin `A' is provided with a riprap outfall, but not a receiving channel. Concentrated stormwater runoff leaving a development site shall be discharged directly into an adequate natural or man-made receiving channel, pipe or storm sewer systm. Adequacy of all channels and pipes shall be verified in the following manner: b. Adequacy of all channels and pipes shall be verified in the following manner: (1) The applicant shall demonstrate that the total drainage area to the point of analysis within the channel is 100 times greater than the contributing drainage area of the project in question; or (2) (a) Natural channels shall be analyzed by the use of a two-year storm to verify that stormwater will not overtop channel banks nor cause erosion of channel bed or banks; (b) All previously c tmcte an -made channels shall be analyzed by the use of a 10-year storm to verify that stomwater will no rtop i rts banks and by the use of a two-year storm to demonstrate that stormwater will not c e e ion of channel bed or banks; and (c) Pip nd storm sewer systems shall be analyzed by the use of a 10-year storm to verify that sto water 'It be contained within the pipe or system. Emphasis of 9VAC25-840-40 (Minimum standards) differs from 9VAC25-870-66 (Water quantity): requirements Aimits of analysis differ slightly. Note: Horizontal limit of floodplain are not point of comparison for b(l), above. Rather, Moore's Creek is. b(2)(a) is NA [dry detention basin /UG detention do not discharge to natural channels, but to slopes], b.(2)(b),(c) are NA. c. Per 9VAC25-840-40.19.g., provide a receiving channel. ISP design proposes riprap outfall for the detention system, not a receiving channel. Project receiving channel must discharge to an existing natural channel, stream, or such point that channel characteristics yield to relatively flat terrain: g. Outfall from a detention facility shall be discharged to a receiving channel, and energy dissipators shall be placed at the outfall of all detention facilities as necessary to provide a stabilized transition from the facility to the receiving channel. d. Note: WP02021-00002 VSMP plan has been submitted; review is pending. e. Albemarle avoids request for revisions not supported by Code /ordinance. Note: Immediately N of development property (TMP # 07700-00-00-00900), 3/22/19 inspection of flume across preserved steep slopes to streambank at Moore's Creek illustrates erosion even within floodplain [photo, Alb. County, below]. MS-19 supports request for man-made channel sized to convey the 10-yr event between contour elev. 360' to 354', designed to resist erosive velocity (Vel2-y,). Engineering Review Comments Page 5 of 5 t ,A 0 �\A yFy fi �1 GV L `{I. •c'�'':.1\l7RL"Y v..._ylCLiDS.a[ - � ':1T;d�! '/i 'n?:1'�Yf.'G'�b„i''y.�:irR'Il Provide copy of deed of easement with City to construct channel between contour 360 and 356' on city property. (Public drainage) easement with City must be recorded prior to WPO plan approval. SWM facility easements must be recorded prior to WPO plan approval (dry detention basin `A' and underground detention). Provide SWM access easement (plat) from SWM facilities to public RW. May show on same plat as SWM facility easement/s. Record SWM access easement prior to /for WPO plan approval. Provide vehicular SWM access easement to dry detention basin `A' that accommodates proposed retaining wall. Vehicular access proximate to basin riser is required. Ensure ESP is revised consistent with revised WPO202100002. General 8. Provide safety railing for retaining walls > 4-ft. high. Show /label safety railing in plan view. 9. Provide TWBW data, all retaining walls, to aid review and construction. 10. Include ESP notes requiring flagging of all preserved steep slopes, prior to construction. 11. Ensure ESP grading complies with requirements at 18-4.3.3, Grading Standards. 12. Provide VDOT LID-204, LD-229 inlet and storm pipe computations (tables). 13. Label all curbing. 14. FSP approval requires approved WPO plan. 15. WPO plan approval requires FDP (floodplain development permit) application for man-made conveyance in floodplain. 16. An approved FDP Application requires a `No RISE' Certificate. 17. Provide typical civil details: PB-1, IS-1, ST-1, SL-1, MH-1. Please feel free to call if any questions: 434.296-5832-x3069. Thank you SDP2021-00003 Avon Court Industrial Bldg ISP 021021 Review Comments for SDP202100003 InikalSit %n Project Name: AVON COURT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING - INITIAL- DIGITAL Date Completed: Wednesday, February 03, 2021 Department/DivisiordAgency: Review Status: Reviewer: Bnan Becker CDD E911 No Objection Page: 1� County of Albemarle Printed On: 02/22/2021 Review Comments for SDP202100003 Initial Site Plan Project Name: AVON COURT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING - INITIAL - DIGFFAL Date Completed: Friday, February 12, 2021 Department/Division/Agency: Review Status: Reviewer Betty Slough CDD Inspections Requested Changes Pager County of Albemarle Printed On: 02/22/2021 Review Comments for SDP202100003 Initial Site Plan Project Name: AVON COURT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING - INITIAL - DIGFFAL Date Completed: Friday, February 12, 2021 Department/Division/Agency: Review Status: Reviewer: Howard Lagomarsino Fire Rescue Requested Changes 1) Please clarify the hydrant on the front/north side of the building, closest to the proposed FDC, is within 100 ft or less of the FDC on the north side of the building. 2) For the proposed fire access road around the building, for those sections where there are no parking spaces provide Fire Lane/No Parking signage or markings to prevent obstruction of emergency vehicle access around the building 3) Please provide needed ISO fire flow for the structure 4) Please provide ACSA fire flaw test No further - HGL Pager County of Albemarle Printed On: 02/22/2021 Review Comments for SDP202100003 Initial Site Plan Project Name: AVON COURT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING - INITIAL - DIGITAL Date Completed: I Monday, February I , 2021 Department/DivisiordAgency: Review Status: Reviewer: Richard Nelson ACSA See Recommendations I recommend SDP202100003 Avon Court Industrial Building - Initial Site Plan for approval with the following conditions: Submit 3 hard copies and a PDF of the utility plan for ACSA review. DB 3575 PG 28 is for a private sewer easement. A new deed of easement naming ACSA as the grantee will be required if the sewer main will be owned by the ACSA. Provide proposed water usage and confirm if there will be industrial waste. RWSA will need to approve the sewer connection into their manhole. Shift the water meter to the end of the proposed water main. Thanks, Richard Nelson Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (434)977-4511 Pager County of Albemarle Printed On: 02/22/2021 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Stephen C. Brich, P.E. 1401 East Broad Street (804) 7862701 Commissioner Richmond, Virginia 23219 Fax: (804) 7862940 January 31, 2021 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Cameron Legille Re: Avon Court Industrial Park — Initial Site Plan SDP-2021-00003 Review # 1 Dear Mr. Langille: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated 4 January 2021, and offers the following comments: 1. Provide anticipated traffic estimates for this development. 2. Identify the design vehicle and include traffic count estimates specifically for this vehicle. 3. What is the circulation plan for the design vehicle? Will trucks be permitted to use the eastern entrance? 4. Will the builder gain access to the site through the proposed permanent entrance, or through the existing construction entrance currently used by Lighthouse Land LLC (the developer across the street)? Use of this construction entrance will require a new permit. 5. Note that the final plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual Appendices 13(1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other requirements. Please provide a digital copy in PDF format of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Doug McAvoy Jr. at (540) 718-6113. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING January 31, 2021 Attn: Cameron Legille A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency Blue Ridge HeaNh Dlshlct VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH February 10, 2021 �Ei�IM �h A ire eo, Cameron Langille, Senior Planner II Albemarle County Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Avon Court Industrial Building Initial Site Plan, SDP202100003 Tax Map: 77-8B Mr. Langille: z i Charlottesville; Albemarle Health Deportment 1138 Rose Hill Drive Charlottesville, VA 22903 ol8ce 434-972-6200 1 for 434-972-4310 As requested, I've reviewed the above -referenced site plan, dated 1/4/21. Since the proposed development will be connected to public water & sewer systems, I have no objection and recommend approval. If there are any questions or concerns, please give me a call, 434-972-4306. Sincerely, Alan Mazurowski Environmental Health Supervisor Thomas Jefferson Health District alan.mazurowski(a�vdh.vir ig nia.gov Cameron Langille From: Deel, Justin <justin.deel@dcr.virginia.gov> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 4:08 PM To: Cameron Langille Subject: Re: Ragged Mountain Dam Break Inundation Zone - Site Plan Proposal CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Cameron, While DCR does not recommend development within dam break inundation zones, further development within this particular DBIZ would not affect the hazard classification or required spillway capacity for Ragged Mountain Dam as it is already rated as High, as you've noted, which is the highest hazard rating. For future reference this will be true for all High hazard dams; however, some parcels may be within more than one DBIZ, with the other dam(s) being Low or Significant, so it's always worth looking into further even if the obvious dam is a High hazard. This parcel does only appear to be within the Ragged Mountain DBIZ. Justin Deel, P.E. Regional Dam Safety Engineer Department of Conservation & Recreation 804-221-0476 On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 3:55 PM Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> wrote: Hi Justin, I am the lead reviewer on an initial site plan application for a parcel that is located within the Ragged Mountain DBIZ. The parcel is TMP 07700-00-00-008BO located on Avon Court, which is a street on the west side of Avon St. Extended. I've attached a PDF of the site plan documents. The project is creating a new 79,000 sq. ft. building to be used for industrial warehousing. The project is also proposing vehicular travel ways and parking areas around the building. It appears that the building and other hardscape improvements will be located within the limits of the DBIZ. According to my records, the Ragged Mountain Dam is owned by RWSA and its hazard class is "High." Can you take a look at this and let me know if DCR has any comments or objections to approving this initial site plan? Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else from me. Thanks, Cameron Cameron Langille (pronounced "LAN-JILL") Senior Planner 11 Albemarle Countv blangilleC@albemarle.org 434-296-5832 x3432 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Cameron Langille From: Dyon Vega <dvega@rivanna.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 8:52 AM To: Cameron Langille Cc: vfort@rivanna.org; Richard Nelson Subject: Avon Court Industrial Building Comments CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Cameron, RWSA has reviewed the Avon Court Industrial Building Initial Site Plans dated 1/4/21 and has the following comments. Sheet C-3: RWSA would like to request access easements along the proposed connection sewer connection along the northwest side of the peninsula and potentially others. We would like to do a site visit to look for the best access easement locations. In the picture below circled in red, on the opposite side of the creek, we need access for previous sewer repairs and would like an access easement there. The MH being connected to is about 10' deep. Please indicate whether you plan to propose a drop connection so we can include those notes on the final site plan. .17 it _ lin OAYM.fRRRN 1 l ..•iw.a.v.r.arn.- y .w..w- Z 1 t ..- Ell 1 Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Dyon Vega Civil Engineer R�VANNA WATERaSE IRAUTHO! Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority (434) 977-2970, Ext. 170 695 Moores Creek Lane Charlottesville, VA 22902 www.rivanna.orQ