HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201400002 Correspondence 2014-01-15 •
vr�.+ • f
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
April 28, 2014
Ellie Carter Ray
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle Community Development
401 McIntire Road
North Wing
Charlottesville,Va. 22902-4596
RE: SDP201400003 Agnor-Hurt Elementary School—Major Amendment- Comment
Response Letter
Dear Ms. Ray: t'„
N -
We have reviewed all of your comments from April 9th, 2014 and made the necessary revisions. Q
•
Please find our responses to the individual comments below: > L c)
Eel On
M
Application Information:
I) [32.5.2(a)] This property is zoned R-6 and, therefore, technically doesn't have parking
setbacks;please remove this information from the "site data". Additionally, this property has U
two fronts;one on Berkmar and one on Woodburn. Because there are two fronts, all of the w
other property lines are sides (fronts and backs don't intersect). Please show the setbacks on
the layout plan and label them correctly. N
Setbacks have been revised. _
H
Rev!: Comment addressed.
E
2) 132.5.2(a)] Provide the names of the owners, zoning district, tax map and parcel number, and
present uses of all abutting parcels. E
Information has been provided. €
Rev!: Comment addressed.
v 3
3) [32.5.2(b)] List the number of parking spaces removed and the number proposed. Verify the
total number of spaces provided; "site data"indicates 118, but the landscape plan states 128.
The total number of pre and post spaces have been verified and listed on Sheet
C1.0. 1 18 parking spaces are provided. The landscape plan has been revised.
Rev.1: Comment addressed.
4) [32.5.2(d)]A critical slope waiver was requested to disturb 0.55 acres of man-made slopes in
excess of 25%. However, a Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) is currently underway that, if
approved, would designate the slopes on this property as "managed". The ZTA, as proposed,
would allow for the disturbance of"managed"critical slopes for many permitted uses as long as
certain design standards are met, and would make this waiver unnecessary. The ZTA will be
{
R:\103\3443 I-AgnorHurt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
Page 2 of 8
heard by the Board of Supervisors on Wednesday March 56. If the ZTA is not approved, the
waiver request will be processed while revisions to the site plan are underway.
The slopes are now considered "managed" and have been noted as such on the
plan.
Rev. I: Comment addressed.
5) [32.5.2(1)] Provide the pavement width for Woodburn Road.
Width has been provided on Sheet C2.0.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
6) [32.5.2(1)] Provide the pavement width for both entrances and their associated accessways.
Widths have been provided. See Sheet CO.I and Sheet C4.0.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
7) [32.5.2(j,k,l)] Verify that the location(s) of all existing or proposed utilities and utility
easements including water, sewer, drainage, telephone, cable, electric and gas are shown on the
plan.
Locations have been verified.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
8) [32.5.2(m)]Show the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection from
the proposed ingress and egress locations.
Distance has been shown for existing and proposed entrance see Sheet CO.1.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
9) [32.6.2(e)5]Provide a legend showing all symbols and abbreviations used on the plan.
A legend has been provided on Sheet C I.I.
Rev. I: Comment addressed.
10) [32.6.2(g)]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.
The waterline easement has been identified.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
I I) (32.6.2(i)] Dimension all travelways.
Travelways have been dimensioned see Sheet C4.0.
Rev. I: Comment addressed.
12) [32.6.2(i)] Show the location of any loading space(s) and provide dimensions.
The entrance to the loading dock on the east side of the building will serve as a
loading space.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
I 3) [32.6.2(i)] Provide the location of any signs.
Signs locations have been provided on Sheet C4.1.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
14) [32.6.2(i)] Indicate the type of surfacing for all paved or gravel areas.
Surfacing type has been indicated with hatches on Sheet C4.0 that match details
on Sheet C 1.1.
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_H urt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
Page 3 of 8
Rev. I: Comment addressed. However, the hatching patterns used to designate
different surfacing types are very hard to distinguish on the copies submitted for
review.
The hatching has been updated.
15) (32.6.2(1)] Label the angle of any non-perpendicular parking spaces.
The angle of non-perpendicular spaces has been labeled.The only non-
perpendicular spaces are the bus parking spaces and the angle of these has been
labeled.
Rev. I: Comment addressed.
16) 132.6.2(1) &4.12.15 (f J] Each end of the 10 parking space row on the eastern side of the
parking lot should be protected by raised traffic islands instead of painted stripes.
Raised curb islands have been added.
Rev. I: Comment addressed.
17) f32.6.2(j)&32.7.9.4(b)]Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials
in order to satisfy the landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9 or to meet
conditions of approval, subject to the agent's approval. It appears that some of the Landscape
Plan should show the trees to be preserved, the limits of clearing, the location and type of
protective fencing,grade changes requiring tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling
proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, the applicant shall sign a conservation
checklist approved by the agent to insure that the specified trees will be protected during
construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a particular case,such
checklist shall conform to specifications contained in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook, pp 111-284 through 111-297, and as hereafter amended. This checklist must be
signed, dated, and added to the landscape plan sheet.
The landscape plan (L I.0) has been updated to show the trees to be preserved,
the limits of clearing, the location and type of protective fencing, grade changes
requiring tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the
limits of clearing. The 'Conservation Checklist' has been added to the landscape
notes and details Sheet (L2.0).
Rev. I: Comment not fully addressed. The majority of the required tree canopy
is provided through preservation of existing trees along the perimeter of the
property. The tree protection measures for these trees are only shown on the
Sheet C3.1, not the landscape plan. Frequently E&S plans are pulled from the
site plan set at the request of Engineering; make sure Sheet C3.I remains with
the site plan set or add an additional landscape sheet showing tree protection for
all trees remaining on the site. Additionally, the conservation checklist must be
completed,signed and dated.
Sheet L I.0 includes reference to Sheet C3.2 for Tree Protection Layout and
Sheet C3.0 for Tree Protection Detail. The Conservation Checklist has been
completed and signed.
18) 132.6.2(j)&32.7.9.6(b)] The 5%landscaped area required shall be planted with a mixture of
shade trees and shrubs and shall include one (I) large or medium shade tree per ten (10)
parking spaces or portion thereof if five (5) spaces or more. As noted above, clarify how many
total parking spaces are proposed. Additionally, it appears that one Betula nigra is proposed
within a striped paved area;please revise.
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_Hurt\Dots\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
r Page 4 of 8
118 parking spaces are proposed. The requirements chart on LI.0 has been
updated to reflect the 5% landscape area for 118 parking spaces. The Betula
nigra within the paved area has been relocated.
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The parking lot tree note indicates that
11.8 (12)trees are required,and only I0 are provided. However, the Landscape
Plan shows many more trees than I0 are proposed. Revise the note to indicate
that at least the minimum required number is provided. Please also revise the
size of the proposed trees to indicate the minimum caliper instead of height. The
minimum requirement for parking lot trees is I '/2" - 13/4" caliper.
The proposed trees tabulation has been updated accordingly. All tree sizes have
been adjusted to I 'h"- 13/4" caliper.
19) [32.6.2(j)&32.7.9.8] The tree canopy requirement for this site is 10%;please provide
information to verify that this requirement is being met. If existing trees are to be used to
satisfy this requirement, provide the information requested above regarding preserving existing
trees in lieu of planting new plant material. Please also provide the tree canopy information for
all proposed plantings.
The landscape plan (L I.0) has been updated to show the trees to be preserved,
the limits of clearing, the location and type of protective fencing,grade changes
requiring tree wells or walls,and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the
limits of clearing. The `Conservation Checklist' has been added to the landscape
notes and details Sheet (L2.0). The plant schedule on L I.0 has been updated to
provide the tree canopy information for all proposed plantings.
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See comment #I7 above. Additionally,
use numbers from the County's "Approved Plant Canopy Calculations" to
indicate the canopy provided by the proposed plantings.
(http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community
Development/forms/applications/Approved Plant Canopy Calculations 02-05-
03.pd
The tree canopy requirement tabulation has been updated accordingly.
20) [32.6.2(k)&4.17] Is any outdoor lighting proposed> If so, all lighting(including building
mounted fixtures) must be shown on a lighting plan that includes a photometric plan, luminaire
schedule and cut sheets for each proposed fixture.
A lighting plan has been included.
Rev. I: Comment not fully addressed; a lighting plan has now been added to the
application, see lighting comments below.
Acknowledged.
21) [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until VDOT completes their review and grants
their approval;comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Engineering, Fire/Rescue, ACSA,
inspections, and E911 comments have been provided.
Acknowledged.
Rev. I: Comment addressed. This amendment cannot be approved until VDOT,
Engineering, Fire/Rescue, and ACSA complete their review and grant their
approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
The VDOT, Engineering, and ACSA comments have been received and
addressed.
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_Hurt\Doa\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
Noire
444.0., Page 5 of 8
22) (32.6.2(k)&4.17]Show the proposed lighting locations on the layout and landscape sheets to
verify that no site conflicts exist.
The proposed lighting is now shown on Sheet C4.0 and L I.O.
23) 132.6.2(k) &4.17] Lighting spillover exceeds 0.5 footcandle along the Woodburn Road right-of-
way, and possibly along the northern property line in one small area;revise the lighting to
reduce the spillover to 0.5 footcandle or less (4.17.4(b)1).
Moved poles to reduce spillover to less than 0.5 FC along Woodburn Road.
24) (32.6.2(k) &4.17]Albemarle County requires that the LLF(maintenance factor)be 1.0;revise
the photometric plan to use the proper LLF.
Revised calculations with LLF set to 1.0.
25) (32.6.2(k) &4.17] Provide the following standard lighting note on the lighting plan: Each
outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full
cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential
districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public
roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one-half
footcandle.
Added note as indicated to plans.
WPO Plan Review(Frank Pohl):
I) Sheets C3.1 and C3.2—Adjust CWD oft-of paved court and onto grassed area. °
The clean water diversion has been moved off the paved court.
2) Sheets C3.I and C3.2 -Adjust CWD on the north side of the parcel so that the clean water is
not routed to the sediment basin.
The clean water diversion has been updated to ensure that clean water is not
being routed through the sediment basin.
,,
3) Sheets C3.I and C3.2—Add fabric to uphill side of slope drain. ,/
Fabric has been added to the uphill side of the slope drain.
4) Sheets C3.1 and C5.1 —Verify that riprap outlet at STR 400 was sized correctly(velocity). '/
The riprap outlet is sized correctly.
5) Sheet C3.2—Add inlet protection to inlet located in small parking lot on north side of building. ` , '`
Inlet protection has been added to STR 108. r'
6) Sheet C6.1 — "pre"should be "post"at bottom of upper pond drainage area table. /V
"Pre" has been changed to "Post".
7) Sheet C6.2-Forgot to mention this one, and it is minor, but in scheduled, "Rim Length"should
be "Rim Elev".
Rim length has been updated to Rim Elev.
7
8) Sheet C6.3—Add pipe 213 crossing to STR 116-Bayfilter #2 profile. /
The profile has been updated.
9) Sheet C7.0—Minor but extend arrows. k
The arrows have been extended.
R:\103\3443 1-Agno r_H urt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
Page 6 of 8
Stormwater Management (Glenn Brooks):
I) I could not find verification of water quality treatment for the new entrance and bus loop area.
Water quality treatment information is provided on Sheet C6.I.
2) Better explanation needs to be provided for the area/volume curve used in the routings. It
appears as though the modeling for the stone field voids and the arches may be counting some
portion of storage areas double, which erroneously helps results.
Design has been changed.
3) I did not find anything regarding MS-19, and we know this is a problem area with the channel
and grate inlet next to Berkmar.
Design has been changed. Flow and volume into channel will not be increased.
Additional flow and volume has been redirected to existing ponds.
4) The storage chamber system is not recommended for a county maintained infrastructure.
Plastic chambers under a heavily loaded bus loop may have structural problems in the long term.
The system is very difficult to inspect and clean out, and as proposed, has no reasonable access.
It is recommended that a surface pond, or reinforced concrete storage chamber system be
considered, and not placed directly under the bus route.
Storage chamber has been removed and stormwater design has been changed.
Review Comments (Max Greene):
I) Curb and gutter should be added to the parking area that drains across the proposed fill over
the existing swale on the North side of the site.
Curb and gutter have been added.
2) Sight distance details (C7.0) should be clearly labeled as new entrance onto Woodburn Road.
Site distance profile labels have been updated.
3) VDOT approval is required for new entrance onto Woodburn Road.
Acknowledged.
Fire and Rescue (Robbie Gilmer):
I) 20 foot lane designed for student drop-off and pick-up needs to have signs "No Parking/
Student Drop-off and Pick-up Only".
Signs have been added. See Sheet C4.I.
2) The inside Radii on the drive lane designed for student drop-o ff and pick-up needs to be no less
than 25 ft.
Radii has been revised to 25'.
3) Bus parking lot needs to have the area near the building marked as "Fire Lane No Parking".
Fire lane marking has been added. See Sheet C4.I.
R:\103\34431Agnor_Hurt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
Page 7 of 8
ACSA (Alex Morrison):
General Notes:
I) Add ACSA Water and Sewer General Conditions.
The ACSA Water and Sewer General Conditions are shown on Sheet C1.2.
Sheet 4.0:
I) Show existing 6"water main from the existing meter to the fire hydrant assembly at the end of
the water main (the water main that extends to the North between "Play Are W/Equipment"
and "(3) Frame Sheds."
The existing main is now shown.
2) Call out existing water main as "6"DIP."
The existing main is now called out as 6" DIP.
3) Update connection to 6"x 6"tapping sleeve and valve, followed by a 90 degree bend (see
sketch I on Sheet 4.0).
The tie in to the existing line has been updated per sketch I.
4) Call out cut and cap after tapping sleeve and valve (see sketch I on Sheet 4.0).
The existing line is now shown as being cut and capped.
5) Add gate valve on fire line to end ACSA ownership (see sketch 2 on Sheet 4.0).
The gate valve has been added.
6) Update water meter service line configuration,per sketch 2 on Sheet 4.0.
The water meter service line configuration has been updated per sketch 2.
7) Add additional proposed ACSA water easement near the proposed water meter, as shown.
The easement has been updated.
8) Call out all bends, fittings,gate valves, etc.
All water structures have now been called out.
9) Add sequence of construction to Sheet 4.0 (see below).
The sequence of construction has been added to Sheet C4.0. However,the final
step in the sequence has been updated to say"Remove existing water main
which is now out of service". It is necessary to remove the line as opposed to
abandoning it in place because the line runs under the proposed building
footprint.
Sheet L 1.0:
I) Show proposed FHA.
The FHA is now shown on Sheet L I.0.
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_Hurt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
April 30,2014
'`Nr'` Page 8 of 8
VDOT(Troy Austin):
I) The sight line and sight distance to the right should be shown on the plan view.
The Site lines/distances to the right,and left are now shown on Sheet CO.I.
2) The entrance detail provided is for a Private Subdivision Road Entrance. The entrance should be
designed based on the Commercial Entrance Design Along Highways with Shoulders standard as
found in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual.
The detail has been updated; it's shown on Sheet C I.2.
We have attached (10) full size of the revised plans and (2)copies of the calculations, and
narratives for your review. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to give me
a call at 434.327.1688.
Sincerely,
CA4k„:1
Craig Kotarski, PE
Project Manager
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_H urt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
•
it Ili*
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS
March 27, 2014
Ellie Carter Ray
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle Community Development
401 McIntire Road
North Wing
Charlottesville,Va. 22902-4596
RE: SDP201400003 Agnor-Hurt Elementary School— Major Amendment- Comment
Response Letter
Dear Ms. Ray: r,,
0
o,
fV n
We have reviewed all of your comments from March 4th, 2014 and made the necessary revisions. Q
Please find our responses to the individual comments below: a, o
H M
Application Information: o
I) [32.5.2(a)] This property is zoned R-6 and, therefore, technically doesn't have parking
setbacks;please remove this information from the "site data". Additionally, this property has
two fronts;one on Berkmar and one on Woodburn. Because there are two fronts, all of the N so
other property lines are sides (fronts and backs don't intersect). Please show the setbacks on
the layout plan and label them correctly. N
et-
Setbacks have been revised.
1-
2) [32.5.2(a)] Provide the names of the owners, zoning district, tax map and parcel number, and >. a
present uses of all abutting parcels. °
O
Information has been provided. s 0
3) [32.5.2(b)] List the number of parking spaces removed and the number proposed. Verify the v 3
total number of spaces provided; "site data"indicates 118, but the landscape plan states 128.
The total number of pre and post spaces have been verified and listed on Sheet
C1.0. 118 parking spaces are provided. The landscape plan has been revised.
4) [32.5.2(d)]A critical slope waiver was requested to disturb 0.55 acres of man-made slopes in -
excess of 25%. However, a Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) is currently underway that, if
approved, would designate the slopes on this property as "managed". The ZTA, as proposed,
would allow for the disturbance of"managed"critical slopes for many permitted uses as long as
certain design standards are met, and would make this waiver unnecessary. The ZTA will be
heard by the Board of Supervisors on Wednesday March 5`h. If the ZTA is not approved, the
waiver request will be processed while revisions to the site plan are underway.
The slopes are now considered "managed" and have been noted as such on the
plan.
R:\I 03\3443 I-Agnor_H urt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
`..r� March 27,2014
Page 2 of 6
5) (32.5.2(1)] Provide the pavement width for Woodburn Road.
Width has been provided on Sheet C2.0.
6) (32.5.2(1)]Provide the pavement width for both entrances and their associated accessways.
Widths have been provided. See Sheet CO.I and Sheet C4.0.
7) (32.5.2(j,k,l)] Verify that the location(s) of all existing or proposed utilities and utility
easements including water, sewer, drainage, telephone, cable, electric and gas are shown on the
plan.
Locations have been verified.
8) 132.5.2(m)]Show the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection from
the proposed ingress and egress locations.
Distance has been shown for existing and proposed entrance see Sheet CO.I.
9) 132.6.2(e)51 Provide a legend showing all symbols and abbreviations used on the plan.
A legend has been provided on Sheet Cl.I.
10) 132.6.2(g)]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.
The waterline easement has been identified.
I 1) 132.6.2(i)]Dimension all travelways.
Travelways have been dimensioned see Sheet C4.0.
I 2) (32.6.2(1)]Show the location of any loading space(s) and provide dimensions.
The entrance to the loading dock on the east side of the building will serve as a
loading space.
13) 132.6.2(i)]Provide the location of any signs.
Signs locations have been provided on Sheet C4.I.
14) 132.6.2(i)] Indicate the type of surfacing for all paved or gravel areas.
Surfacing type has been indicated with hatches on Sheet C4.0 that match details
on Sheet C I.I.
15) 132.6.2(in Label the angle of any non-perpendicular parking spaces.
The angle of non-perpendicular spaces has been labeled.The only non-
perpendicular spaces are the bus parking spaces and the angle of these has been
labeled.
I6) 132.6.2(i) &4.12.15 (f)] Each end of the 10 parking space row on the eastern side of the
parking lot should be protected by raised traffic islands instead of painted stripes.
Raised curb islands have been added.
I7) (32.6.2(j)&32.7.9.4(b)] Existing trees maybe preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials
in order to satisfy the landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9 or to meet
conditions of approval, subject to the agent's approval. It appears that some of the Landscape
Plan should show the trees to be preserved, the limits of clearing, the location and type of
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_Hurt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
,,,,re March 27,2014
Page 3 of 6
protective fencing, grade changes requiring tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling
proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, the applicant shall sign a conservation
checklist approved by the agent to insure that the specified trees will be protected during
construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a particular case, such
checklist shall conform to specifications contained in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook, pp 111-284 through 111-297, and as hereafter amended. This checklist must be
signed, dated, and added to the landscape plan sheet.
The landscape plan (L I.0) has been updated to show the trees to be preserved,
the limits of clearing, the location and type of protective fencing, grade changes
requiring tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the
limits of clearing. The'Conservation Checklist' has been added to the landscape
notes and details Sheet (L2.0).
18) (32.6.2(j)&32.7.9.6(b)] The 5%landscaped area required shall be planted with a mixture of
shade trees and shrubs and shall include one (1) large or medium shade tree per ten (10)
parking spaces or portion thereof if five (5) spaces or more. As noted above, clarify how many
total parking spaces are proposed. Additionally, it appears that one Betula nigra is proposed
within a striped paved area;please revise.
1 18 parking spaces are proposed. The requirements chart on L I.0 has been
updated to reflect the 5% landscape area for 1 18 parking spaces. The Betula
nigra within the paved area has been relocated.
19) (32.6.2(j)&32.7.9.8] The tree canopy requirement for this site is 10%;please provide
information to verify that this requirement is being met. If existing trees are to be used to
satisfy this requirement, provide the information requested above regarding preserving existing
trees in lieu of planting new plant material. Please also provide the tree canopy information for
all proposed plantings.
The landscape plan (L I.0) has been updated to show the trees to be preserved,
the limits of clearing,the location and type of protective fencing, grade changes
requiring tree wells or walls,and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the
limits of clearing. The 'Conservation Checklist' has been added to the landscape
notes and details Sheet (L2.0). The plant schedule on L I.0 has been updated to
provide the tree canopy information for all proposed plantings.
20) [32.6.2(k)&4.17] Is any outdoor lighting proposed> If so, all lighting(including building
mounted fixtures) must be shown on a lighting plan that includes a photometric plan, luminaire
schedule and cut sheets for each proposed fixture.
A lighting plan has been included.
21) (Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until VDOT completes their review and grants
their approval;comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Engineering, Fire/Rescue,ACSA,
inspections, and E911 comments have been provided.
Acknowledged.
7
WPO Plan Review(Max Greene & Frank Pohl): v
I) Please submit a request for a modified inlet protection for the files.
Request has been submitted. tsp ' 6l c' '
‘72) Please state on the plans the date of topography. If topo is more than 1 year old, then please
note on plan that topo was visually field verified by Engineer and date of verification.
Date has been stated on Sheet C 1.0.
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_Hurt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
March 27,2014
'r"` Page 4 of 6
X) Please locate at least I bench mark on the plans that will be utilized throughout the duration of
the site work.
A benchmark has been added see Sheet C2.0.
4) Inlet protection shown is for toe of slope installation due to lack of emergency overflow and can
cause erosion problems when installed in other location. Please show inlet protections suited for
each application.
Inlet details have been coordinated see Sheet C3.0.
✓5) Please place a note next to the sediment trap "Sediment control structure removals shall be
approved in writing from WPO inspector."
Note has been added see Sheet C3.I.
6) Cleanwater diversion appears to dump a large area of drainage into back of building with no
outlet. Please explain how stormwater is to be handled at the outlet of the Cleanwater
Diversion.
Design has been revised see Sheet C3.I.
Cleanwater diversion near Woodburn Road is within the proposed grading and will need to be
moved back if water is to remain clean.
Grading has been revised.
\,16 Cleanwater diversion will require a lining to prevent erosion of the berm.
Lining has been added.
it„ 01) Cleanwater diversion across critical slope will require a lot of grading to install. Please show
_i;'� � grading required to install Cleanwater diversion in conformance with Std. &Spec 3.17— 4 iti rc.
'r,, ix 11 Stormwater conveyance Channel. -*5�:/ +
•\,,p I Clean water diversions have been relocated to avoid critical slopes. r�
fN v f
l 10) Please clarify drainage path from sediment basin and detention facility. te+L 14 t 7
�w' Drainage area is shown with a dashed line and divisions see Sheet C3.I I.
Inlet protection along Woodburn Road appears too shallow and may cause the stormwater to
overflow down the slope into the Cleanwater diversion. Please show detail of how this will be
kriltV
constructed.
A detail for culvert inlet protection has been added see Sheet C3.0.
1.1'1) Mountable berm appears to be draining in the wrong direction.
The angle of the berm has been adjusted to ensure positive drainage.
\3) Several inlet protections may be exceeding the I acre drainage area limit. Please show
corresponding drainage areas for each sediment control structure including roof drains. (Inlets
draining to sediment basin with overland relief flows into basin are exempt from I acre rule.)
All existing and proposed roof drains are routed underground. Inlet protection
drainage areas have been shown see Sheet C3.I and C3.2.
"14) Please show inlet protection on the existing inlet in the parking lot on the South side of the site.
This may not be required unless the WPO inspector requires it.
R:\103\34431-Agnor_Hurt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
March 27,2014
No., Page 5 of 6
Inlet protection has been added.
'7) 15) Please show curb and gutter along I I space parking area to reduce erosion on new slope.
f Curb and gutter has been added. r, k°1C�� �� .0 IN t-
1 16) Diversion into basin from building does not appear to be a stable proposal and could blow-out in
a storm event. Please clarify the construction and stability of the diversion across •- ' i :- .,__
swale area. Please consider extending basin over existing swale. S, ' '� �3 2�
Design has been revised see Sheet C3.I. l�
Please show Albemarle County detail for temporary paved construction en . - . - • ••
Detail has been added see Sheet C3.0.
Stormwater Management (Glenn Brooks):
I) I could not find verification of water quality treatment for the new entrance and bus loop area.
Water quality treatment information is provided on Sheet C6.Imo. I ,,�t�
`its.-- i loci (Ate y�'►Z.e L,1rvt iwfE-t°' ,A2,•t , /. (-74:'4-c ,� • r 7cl
2) Bette" rp anation heeds to be provided for the area/volume cLM used in the routings. It --.F--
appears as though the modeling for the stone field voids and the arches may be counting some
portion of storage areas double, which erroneously helps results.
Design has been changed. ; •
/.0 77liv
✓3) I did not find anything regarding MS-19, and we know this is a problem area with the channel
and grate inlet next to Berkmar.
Design has been changed. Flow and volume into channel will not be increased.
Additional flow and volume has been redirected to existing ponds. U, f4"tct'kt fica"t170-01
4) The storage chamber system is not recommended for a county maintained infrastructure. l `k-r -s e
Plastic chambers under a heavily loaded bus loop may have structural problems in the long term.'Tb 110-1 7
The system is very difficult to inspect and clean out, and as proposed, has no reasonable access. 14A j'—lc
It is recommended that a surface pond, or reinforced concrete storage chamber system be o Ki
considered, and not placed directly under the bus route.
Storage chamber has been removed and stormwater design has been change . 3.
t...4.-w-
Review Comments (Max Greene): -w SD .Z/
X1t LJ�
I) Curb and gutter should be added to the parking area that drains across the proposed fill over //I ,
the existing swale on the North side of the site.
_ 1:714itteell
Curb and gutter have been added.
12) Sight distance details (C7.0) should be clearly labeled as new entrance onto Woodburn Road. e
Site distance profile labels have been updated.
( b , I
✓ 3) VDOT approval is required for new entrance onto Woodburn Road. ff -c-
Acknowledged. ,i £ l;, ?
Fire and Rescue (Robbie Gilmer): 'PC-'Yf
I) 20 foot lane designed for student drop-off and pick-up needs to have signs "No Parking/
Student Drop offand Pick-up Only". —
�_f) 6,t�'�, (4-.
Signs have been added. See Sheet C4.I. t)
(119Q R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_H urt\Docs\2-Design\Letters
March 27,2014
``w Page6of6
2) The inside Radii on the drive lane designed for student drop-off and pick-up needs to be no less
than 25 ft.
Radii has been revised to 25'.
3) Bus parking lot needs to have the area near the building marked as "Fire Lane No Parking".
Fire lane marking has been added. See Sheet C4.I.
ACSA (Alex Morrison):
I) Need 3 copies of the construction plan submitted to Jeremy Lynn, PE.
Acknowledged.
2) Need water data sheet submitted to Jeremy Lynn, PE.
Acknowledged.
3) Need existing building fixture counts submitted to Jeremy Lynn, PE.
Acknowledged.
4) Need Proposed additional fixture counts submitted to Jeremy Lynn, PE.
Acknowledged.
VDOT(Troy Austin):
I) The proposed entrance onto Woodburn Road will need to be designed and constructed in
accordance with VDOT commercial entrance standards. The appropriate detail should be
added to the plans and the entrance should be dimensioned accordingly.
Entrance has been revised to comply with VDOT commercial entrance standards
and detail has been added. See Sheet C I.2.
2) The sight distance shown on the plans for the proposed entrance onto Woodburn Road does not
meet the minimum sight distance requirements. This entrance cannot be approved unless it
meets the minimum requirements.
Design has been revised and the 390' site distance requirement is now met. See
Sheet C7.0.
We have attached (8) full size of the revised plans and (2) copies of the calculations, and
narratives for your review. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to give me
a call at 434.327.1688.
Sincerely,
et.,61LA,1 /
Craig Kotarski, PE
Project Manager
R:\103\3443 I-Agnor_H urt\Docs\2-Design\Letters