HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201200152 Correspondence 2012-12-20 COLLINS GARRETT ST, SUITE K CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22902
•
434.293.3719 PH 434.293.2813 FX
www.collins-engineering.com
Max Greene
Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville,VA 22902
RE: Belvedere Phase II Road and WPO Plans(SUB 201200152 and WPO 201200096)
Thank you for your comments on the project referenced above. Please let this letter supplement the
revised plans in response to your comments dated January 14th, 2013.
1. Road and drainage plans(SUB 201200152)
a. VDOT approval is required. [DM905]
This comment is acknowledged.
�b. Please show stop signs on alley intersection with public roads.
The plans have been revised to show stop signs at all alley intersections with public roads. (Sheet 3)
/c.' County E-911 road name signs are not to be attached to State required traffic control signs.
Please show separated signs for each on all intersections. Generally, "Stop" signs are on the
right side of the intersection and the E_911 "street name" sign is on the left.
The plans have been revised to show separate street signs on the left side of the road and stand-alone
stop signs on the right side of all road intersections. (Sheet 3)
d. Please show the signs more prominently if they are not going to be individually labeled on the
road plan.
♦ The revised size of the signs has been exaggerated on the plans. For example, the diameter for the stop
sign is now shown as 12 inches. (Sheet 3)
e. Please show"No Parking" signs with arrows at the beginning and end of no parking areas with
'`/NY additional "No Parking" signs every 100' or more often between end designation signs.
Appears only Colbert Street requires"No Parking" signs.
After numerous correspondences with Fire& Rescue and Planning, it was determined these roads should
all have informal parking on one side of the road, and no parking on the opposite side marked with "no
parking"signs. All roadways meet current VDOT regulations and during a phone conversation between
Mr. Greene and Mr. Murray of Collins Engineering it was also determined this was an acceptable road
configuration for Engineering provided it was acceptable with Planning. Consequently all roads now
show "No Parking"signs with a maximum spacing every 100'along the roadway. Notes have also been
added to the plans for each street notifying the contractor which side of the street is to be reserved for
no pa ing. (Sheet 3)
f. Typical street section for Colbert Street needs to show the crown in the road centered on the
travel-way with parking on one side of the travel-way and "No Parking" signs on the other.
The typical sections for the roadways have been revised to show informal parking on one side of all of
the roadways, and no parking with appropriate signs on the opposite side of the road. (Sheet 11)
,g/Appears parking is allowed on both sides of Dabney Grove, Griffen Grove and Farrow Drive.
The "No Parking" signs for these roads may be removed from the plan.
Please see the responses to comments#1 E and#1F. (Sheet 3)
h. Please show Farrow Drive 34' curb to curb for the entire length as stated in VDOT preliminary
comments and remove note stating the road is to be narrowed between Dabney Grove and
Butler Street.
The plans have been revised such that Farrow Drive is now 34'wide face-of-curb to face-of-curb and the
previously referenced note has been removed. (Sheet 3)
-RA—S n i. Please show sight distance easements on the planting plan for review.
5 J g h,4 .5 'Phe sight distance easements have been added to the landscaping plans. (Sheet 13)
j. Alleys need drop inlets installed along the edge/curbing and on each side of entrances to
prevent the runoff producing storm event from entering the street.
The plans have been revised to show two flanking inlets at each of the alley intersections with VDOT
maintained roads where runoff could flow downhill into the streets. The additional inlets will reduce the
risk of runoff from entering the streets. (Sheet 5)
,..-----k. Please change all turning radii to a minimum 25' as required in the preliminary plan approval.
The plans have been revised and the majority of the curb returns now have radii of 25 feet. The six curb
returns that do not have a minimum curb radii of 25 feet are located at intersections with oversized
widths due to the informal parking on one side. Because the effective turning radii are in excess of 25'
VDOT determined during a phone conversation between Ms. Oleynik and Mr. Murray on 2/8/13 the
smaller curb radii was acceptable. Also, during a phone conversation between Mr. Greene and Mr.
Murray it was determined this was an acceptable solution provided VDOT was accepting of the layout.
(Sheet 3)
I. Miles and Philips alleys are shown with over 10%slopes.
D ' g a phone conversation between Mr. Gilmer and Mr. Murray it was determined the proposed
grades shown on the alleyways were acceptable. During a follow-up conversation between Mr. Murray
and Mr. Greene it was determined this was an acceptable design for Engineering provided Fire and
Rescue found it to be acceptable. (Sheet 7)
2. Stormwater Management and Mitigation Plan (WP0201200096)
a. Please provide an adequate channel analysis for runoff from proposed construction. Analysis
could be proven given:
i. Adherence to VESCH MS-19 requirements(see 4VAC50-30-40, MS-19 sec. b (1)):The
applicant shall demonstrate that total drainage area to the point of analysis within the
channel is one hundred times greater than the contributing drainage areas of the project in
question. A report or plan depiction with analysis to this point could prove channel
adequacy.
A revised channel adequacy exhibit and report has been provided with the submittal package showing
various cross sections up to approximately one mile below the proposed facility's outfall. The final cross
section analyzed is immediately upstream of the South Fork Rivanna River where the proposed
development's drainage area is approximately 1%of the total watershed. (Submittal Package
calculations)
ii. adherence to VA code 10.1-603.4(7):essentially,the required condition for an on-site
solution without looking downstream for a 24 hour 1.5, 2, and 10-year intensity event-
(post-development) Peak flow rate<= Pf*Vf/Vp
Where Pf= peak flow rate in a forested condition
Vf= runoff volume in a forested condition
Vp= runoff volume proposed
Option 2A (i)was selected in lieu of option 2A(ii)
Noe
b. Type III retention basin does not appear designed in accordance with VSMH 3.06. Basin
appears to be a shell for the construction of a retention basin. Please show appropriate
shoreline fringe, riparian fringe, and flood plain terrace vegetation in accordance with
expected frequency and duration of inundation. Selection and installation guidelines should
be per Minimum Standards 3.05, Landscaping.
The plans have been revised to show a shoreline fringe, riparian fringe and flood plain terrace
vegetation. The plans also show a safety/access maintenance bench. (Sheet 13 of the road plans)
3. Erosion Control Plan (WPO201200096)
a. Please add this note to the plan "SB#1B will not be removed until the road and drainage
system is installed and approved by the WPO Inspector."
The verbiage referenced above has been added to notes on the WPO plans. (Sheet 3&4)
b. A portion of the proposed grading and retaining wall are off the page in the lower right hand
corner of the plan sheets. Please show the entire project for adequate review. Additional
comments may be forthcoming due to missing information for what appears to be an
unprotected swale and wall construction.
The retaining wall behind lot 196 was reduced in length and sediment basin#2 was relocated. This
combination,supplemented by proposed silt fence, adequately projects the downstream swale. Also, a
matchline has been added to the plans to show all of the sediment basin's drainage area. (Sheet 4)
c. Please show the full extent of the paths to be constructed and how they will be protected.
The full extent of the proposed pathway is shown on sheet 4 and terminates at the property line. The
path is protected via a combination of diversions, a sediment basin and silt fence. The plans also have
been revised to denote this. (Sheet 4)
If you have any questions regarding the proposed plans please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Graham Murray, PE