Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO202200032 Review Comments WPO VSMP 2023-03-03�q off pig 401 McIntire Road, North Wing County of Albemarle Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579 Telephone:434-296-5832 COMMUNITY ��BGIN�Q' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT WWW.ALBEMARLE.ORG VSMP Permit Plan Review Project title: Berkmar Self Storage VSMP Project file number: WPO2022-00032 Plan preparer: Campbell Bolton, PE / Timmons Group [ Campbell.bolton(c�r�timmons.com ] 608 Preston Ave., Suite 200 / Charlottesville, VA 22903 Owner or rep.: Berkmar Holdings, LLC — Frank Stoner [fstoneramilestonepartners.com ] 411 East Franklin Street, Suite 400 Richmond, VA 23219 Plan received date: 19 Jul 2022 (Rev. 1) 13 Oct 2022 (Rev. 2) 8 Feb 2023 Date of comments: 25 Aug 2022 (Rev. 1) 15 Nov 2022 (Rev 2) 3 Mar 2023 Reviewer: John Anderson, PE, CFM County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is disapproved for reasons listed below. The VSMP application content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-401. A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) The SWPPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-405. A SWPPP must contain (1) a PPP, (2) an ESOP, (3) a SWMP, and (4) any TMDL measures necessary. SWPPP 1. Revise SWPPP cover to include ref. to WP0202200032, (Rev. 1) Addressed, 2. Registration Statement, SWPPP Sec. 1 a. Sec. IA and Sec. V of Registration Statement are the same entity. If Sec. IA is TBL, then statement should remain unsigned until Construction Activity Operator is named /listed. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant response (10/13/22 letter): `Signature has been removed from Registration Statement. LOD has been revised to reflect all plan revisions.' b. Sec. III: Once Construction Activity Operator named Aisted, please include valid email. (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `Once contractor is selected, the section will be completed (understood prior to receiving grading permit).' (Rev. 2) Persists. Applicant response (letter, 2/7/23): `Once contractor is selected, the section will be completed (understood prior to receiving grading permit.)' [Rev. 1 response] Rev. 2 response: `Same response; will be provided prior to approval.' c. Sec. III, off -site support activity: If anticipate off -site disposal, please complete this section. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `No off -site activity is anticipated at this time.' 3. Sec. 4/5: Update once ESC /SWM plan sheets revised. (Rev. 1) Addressed. 4. Sec. 6.A.: SWPPP Exhibit (I I" x 17"), update as needed. (Rev. 1) Addressed. 5. Sec. 6.E.: List named individual responsible for PPP. Not required for plan approval but required to receive a grading permit. (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `Once contractor is selected, the section will be completed (understood prior to receiving grading permit).' (Rev. 2) Persists. Applicant: `Same response, will be provided prior to grading permit.' 6. Sec. 8: List named individual responsible for VESCH /SWPPP compliance inspections. Not required for plan approval but required to receive a grading permit (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `Once contractor is Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 9 selected, the section will be completed (understood prior to receiving grading permit).' (Rev. 2) Persists. Applicant: `Same response, will be provided prior to grading permit.' 7. Sec. 9: Signed Certification: complete /required prior to plan approval. (Rev. 1) Addressed. B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP) — See above, items 4, 5. The PPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-404. C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a SWMP. This plan is disapproved for reasons listed below. The stormwater management plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-403. 1. C0.0 a. Revise plan set title to include ref. to WPO202200032. (Rev. 1) Addressed. b. List associated (off -site) SDP-WPO plans, including: (Rev. 1) Addressed. Listed under `Site Data' on Sheet C0.0. i. WPO201800030, Charlottesville -Albemarle SPCA ii. WP0201600011, Harvest Moon iii. WP0201600011, Kegler's Pond As -built iv. WPO201100076, Rivanna Plaza v. Rivanna Plaza easement plat @ DB-PG 3839-301 vi. SDP199500087, Lowe's Home Improvement Center (Calculations /approved site plan) vii. SDP200300102, Lowe's Minor Amendment 2. C6.2 a. Revise capacity of pipe 417 103 such that Q provided > Q required (24.466cfs v. 38.16cfs). (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `We think reviewer means pipe 103 (not 127) [yes, true, thank you]. Pipe 103 has been upsized. See Sheet C6.2.' Please note: Table, C6.2 appears to report identical values for pipe 103 as listed in comment, possible review error. If so, please notify. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `Storm pipe calculations have been updated to reflect latest layout and grading. All pipes have Q provided > Q required.' 3. C6.3 a. Revise Calculations (7/15/22), SWPPP, and plan to reference: i. Existing dry detention basin, SWM facility ID 0021.01 rather than `Keglers Regional Pond' since Kegler's is not a regional pond within regulatory meaning of the definition, but rather a typical SWM facility immediately adjacent to development areas which drain to it. Many developments drain to it, but it was constructed primarily to serve Kegler's (bowling alley) and Lowe's 30 years ago. As development has progressed along Berkmar (Harvest Moon, UVA Credit Union, ACSPCA /improvements pending, Berkmar Overlook, now Berkmar Self -Storage /hotel), reliance on the small detention basin is a proposition Engineering evaluates with care since the Ex. detention basin is not a `regional' facility. VAC states: "A locality's VSMP authority may develop comprehensive stormwater management plans to be approved by the department [DEQ] that meet the water quality objectives, quantity objectives, or both of this chapter." (9VAC25-870-92). 9VAC25-870-69 outlines offsite compliance options that a VSMP authority may allow an operator to use to meet required phosphorus nutrient reductions, including "Offsite controls utilized in accordance with a comprehensive stormwater management plan adopted pursuant to 9VAC25-870-92 for the local watershed within which a project is located." The small detention basin was not developed by Albemarle as a regional SWM facility —it is simply a detention basin. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Reference to Kegler's Regional Pond has been removed. b. Include supplemental narrative in Cale. packet: Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 9 i. Please state: "Albemarle SWM facility database states existing dry detention basin watershed is 61.87 Ac. with 21.37 Ac. impervious. Plan approval date is 11/19/87. Facility is listed in county SWM database (co -owned by) Keglers of Charlottesville and Lowes Investment Corp 434/"Proposed development, Berkmar Self -Storage, appears to lack ownership in the facility, or privilege to use it. Applicant parcel is not child to parent subdivision that might assign use rights to Applicant. Applicant should coordinate /execute notarized Agreement with owner to use the existing dry detention basin, and furnish copy to Albemarle. Albemarle would not be party to this Agreement, but relies on prior -recorded instruments —see item iii. If Applicant is aware of an implicit right to rely upon the existing dry detention basin exists (via recorded instrument), please advise Engineering so we may forward document/s to county attorney's office for their review. (Rev. 1) Need for Agreement persists. Applicant: `The supplemental narrative has been added as requested to the calculations packet. The owner/engineer are working with the County regarding legal documentation.' Note: Albemarle is not party to the Agreement. (Rev. 2) Comment revised: If easement plat /Notarized Agreement with adjacent parcel are famished to Albemarle with or prior to ESP submittal -approval, that is soon enough. Applicant: `Noted. The Owner is currently working on preparing all required easement plats and agreements needed to complete the work within the offsite basin.' As follow- up: ref. county email to Applicant, March 3, 2023 10:29 AM. ii. Add Note ref. to: Deed of Easement (establishes right of County to Maintain), DB-PG: 1786-0734, recorded 2/9/99. (Rev. 1) Addressed. iii. Add Note ref. to: Detention Pond Easement Plat, DB-PG: 1786-0737, plat by Wiley & Wilson, Lynchburg, April 15, 1994. (Rev. 1) Addressed. iv. Add Note ref. to: County of Albemarle deed of easement with Keglers of Charlottesville (item iii, above). (Rev. 1) Addressed. c. Revise ex. detention basin detail rim of riser label to read 471.0 rather than 417.0. (Rev. 1) Addressed. [Image removed with Rev. 2 comments] 4. Calculation packet /Additional: a. Revise title /cover of calc. packet to ref. to WPO202200032. (Rev. 1) Addressed. b. Please review, compare (with calcs), and incorporate, as needed: i. SDP200300102 Lowe's Home Centers Inc. Minor Amendment, and ii. SDP199500087, Lowe's Calculations and Approved plan in Berkman Self -Storage evaluation of ex. detention basin (design, parameters, As -built volume /structures, routings, etc.), and revise design /calculations, as needed. Note: Albemarle sent link to files /plans: County Engineer (Frank Pohl) to Timmons Group (C. Kotarski) and Milestone Partners (Frank Stoner), Sep. 28, 2021, 4:30 PM. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The Lowes calculations (SDP-1995-0087) packet has been referenced on Sheets C6.0 and C6.1. SDP-2003-00102 was a minor amendment to the photometrics of the parking lot and not applicable to hydrology.' c. Separate post-DEV offsite drainage areas into discrete areas since CN / Tc differ for off -site DAs. i. Tc, Berkmar Overlook residential development, for example, C6.1 should be routed with Tc=7.2min, not 20.5min, as appears to be the case on pg. 25 of calc. packet. Please route offsite Areas A, B, C as distinct separate DAs in HydroCAD pre- /post-DEV routings. ii. Specifically, the following (see C6.1) should route as sub -catchments, not a weighted Tc /CN, single, off -site contributing DA to the dry detention basin: 1. DA Area —A (S of Berkman Overlook Development): 36.6 Ac, CN =70, Tc =20.5min 2. 36.6 DA: Delineate developed v. undeveloped; route developed areas and one undeveloped area to obtain a composite pre- /post-DEV (pre- /post, identical) peak flow for each inlet discharging to the basin: a. Developed parcels NW of Int. Woodbrook Drive Berkmar Drive. b. Charlottesville -Albemarle SPCA Engineering Review Comments Page 4 of 9 c. Harvest Moon d. UVA credit union e. Undeveloped Note: At first glance, SPCA, Credit Union and Harvest Moon appear to have high CN /low Tc, and may be anticipated to deliver peak flow rates nearly simultaneously. Also, pre- /post-DEV rates for all off -site areas will be identical, since not affected by Berkmar Self -Storage development, but it is important to discriminate between off -site developed v. undeveloped areas as was done for Berkmar Overlook. Timmons Group likely has reliable post-dev H&H data for ACSPCA (WPO201800030), having prepared the design. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `Revisions have been made to the H&H calculations packet per above directive.' 3. Route Lowe's to basin, along with areas discussed in items 4.c.ii. L-2., above. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `This area is accounted for in the H&H model.' 4. Route Kegler's (bowling alley) to basin, along with 1,2,3. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `This area is accounted for in the H&H model.' 5. Route Rivanna Plaza to basin, along with L-4. Note: Engineering does not use /run HydroCAD; we comment on methodology. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `This area is not accounted for in the H&H model since this site does not drain to the pond. In the `Berkman Drive North Extension Drainage Map 03-30-1994, this area is listed as "undetained." Please see plans by DDR showing storm network connecting directly to storm pipes along Route 29.' 6. DA B (Berkmar Overlook development): 6.78 Ac., CN =80.9, Tc=7.2min. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `This area is accounted for in the H&H model. Area is 7.43 acres and CN is 79.2 per amendment 2 of the plan.' 7. DA C (Berkmar Overlook development): 0.90 Ac., CN =65.8, Tc =6min. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `This area is accounted for in the H&H model.' iii. Notes: 1. Berkmar Overlook west of Berkman Drive employs on -site detention, detained offsite Q peak more accurately models (HydroCAD) post-DEV Q peak rates. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The Berkmar Overlook basin has been added to the model.' 2. Berkmar Self -Storage should rely on post-DEV scenario anticipated by WPO201800030 which proposes on -site detention with improvements at ACSPCA. HydroCAD for ACSPCA (anticipated future development) and Berkmar Overlook (existing development) should reflect detained off -site pre- /post-DEV discharge rates when evaluating Berkmar Self -Storage storrnwater quantity compliance. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The ACSPCA model has been incorporated into the routing calculations for this plan.' 3. Analysis that may not consider detained release from off -site sources that contribute runoff to ex. dry detention basin (Kegler's Pond) requires revision, and may ultimately require Berkmar Self -Storage on -site detention similar to on - site detention practices proposed at ACSPCA (design stage) Berkmar Overlook (construction stage). (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The model has been revised.' 4. To the extent Berkmar Self -Storage relies on off -site dry detention (Keglers) for water quantity compliance, Applicant should furnish notarized Agreement between Berkmar and Keglers. ..sibility f F the ,.g gite SIAW facility (931. jetention) Initial WPO plan Engineering Review Comments Page 5 of 9 indicates that the existing detention basin cannot provide detention for Berkmar Self -Storage without structural modification [Stormwater Narrative, sheet Cam. (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `Applicant will coordinate this item with the County.' Note: Agreement is between Berkmar and Keglers, and not Berkmar and Albemarle. (Rev. 2) Partially addressed. Applicant: `Applicant will continue to coordinate the required agreements with adjacent landowner and the County. It is our understanding the basin is currently maintained by the County and it will continue to be maintained by the County long-term.' Engineering confirms that the existing detention basin is a county -maintained facility, with no expectation that Berkmar Self -Storage /Hotel maintain this ex. SWM facility [Also, email to Applicant, March 3, 2023 11:45 AM, J. Anderson to Frank Stoner /Campbell Bolton]. This project will undertake physical modifications required for Applicant to rely on existing, County -maintained SWM facility. Note: Applicant should continue to pursue Agreement with Kegler's of Charlottesville (bowling alley, TMP 04500-00-00-112C0) to secure platted - deeded public drainage easement across both development parcel and adjacent Kegler's (bowling) parcel. Note: Platted deeded recorded easement required prior to final site plan approval [see County email, March 3, 2023 10:29 AM], a prerequisite to FSP approval. iv. Lowes. 15.40 Ac., CN =92, Tc = undefined, route Lowe's storm runoff in pre- /post- DEV with defined Tc. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The information used in the model has been taken from the approved Lowe's plan.' v. Keglers (bowling alley): 5.61 Ac., CN =84, Tc = undefined, route Kegler's in pre- /post- DEV with defined Tc. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The plan did not disclose what Tc they used. The site is mostly impervious utilizing mostly concrete pipe conveyance resulting in a low Tc. A minimum Tc of 6.0 min was used for the most conservative approach.' vi. Please include Construction Record Drawing, Kegler's Pond (As -built) by Dominion Engineering, dated 3/16/16 (approved 4/7/16=WPO20160001 I Rev. 1 comment date) with Berkmar Self -Storage plans. Print /digital As -built available to Applicant. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `Since the survey is the most up-to-date it has been used for current conditions of the pond and structures. Additionally, our survey had relevant information of the riser and pipe size that was not included on the as -built plan. The survey was completed by Roudabush Gale and Associates (previously Dominion Engineering) earlier this year. We believe it is a more accurate depiction of the current state of the pond.' vii. If modification proposed to existing detention (ex. dry detention basin), please provide plan /profile detail (small-scale) of both existing structure and any proposed change. (Rev. 1) Addressed. viii. Revise calculations, as needed, to reflect ex. detention basin As -built riser rim elev. /invert out elev. /embankment elev. /ex pipe/s DIA, etc. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: see response at item vi., immediately above. ix. Rivanna Plaza drains to Ex. detention, revise calculations, as needed, to reflect pre- /post- DEV flow from Rivanna Plaza. Note: See instrument / plat at DB-PG 3839-301, 1/13/2010 for easement/s established /vacated with WPO201100076 (Rivanna Plaza). (Rev. 1) NA. Per TG research and discussion, Applicant response: `As discussed with reviewer, Rivanna Plaza does not drain to the pond, although this area was included as un-detained area in the original pond design.' 5. If on -site SWM is required, a recorded SWM facility /public drainage easement plat (with deeds) is required for VSMP /WPO plan approval. (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `Acknowledged, our intention is to use the offsite detention pond.' (Rev. 2) May persist pending geotechnical evaluation of existing detention basin embankment, which, depending on test results, may render existing facility unreliable for adequate detention of additional storm runoff. In that event, a WPO plan Amendment to provide alternate on -site Engineering Review Comments Page 6 of 9 detention is a possibility, however remote. Calculations to date indicate the existing detention facility (which serves multiple developments) may be modified to accommodate compliant discharge from proposed development [ Berkmar Self -Storage, see email March 3, 2023 10:13 AM to Applicant]. Results of geological testing are requested /required prior to ESP approval, and as soon as possible. Applicant: `No on -site SWM is proposed. However, the owner is currently working on preparing all required easement plats and agreements needed to complete the work within the offsite basin.' 6. If on -site SWM required, please include Construction Record Drawings (As -built for VSMR on the plans, as well as practice -specific SWM installation, periodic inspection /maintenance information on the plans. (Rev. 1) Not addressed, unless overlooked. Please direct reviewer to location /sheet 4 of .PDF on plans. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `No onsite SWM is proposed. However, the .PDF has been added to sheet C 1.1 and is referenced on sheet C6.3.' .PDF appears on sheet C 1.1. 7. C6.0, C6.1 a. Ref. comments elsewhere. Revise pre- /post-DA maps to define discrete contributing DAs with more accurate CN /Tc values. (Rev. 1) Addressed. 8. Letter of nutrient credit availability (5.016.) must be included on the plans. (Rev. 1) Addressed, 9. New: Unless discharge at Str. 100 is to a manmade channel, EB applies at Str. 100. Please make provision to extend manmade channel from Str. 100 to dry detention basin which straddles Kegler's and Lowe's parcels. This plan does not meet EB requirements at Str. 100, but appears to meet EB at outfall of dry detention basin. Between Str. 100 and the detention basin, please show compliance with state stormwater channel protection requirements for storm runoff release to a manmade channel (riprap ditch), 9VAC25- 870-66.B_1. (Rev. 2) Addressed Sheet C3.4. Additional COMMENTS from 12/15/2022 email: • Greg Harper /Water Resources approval is paramount. WR maintains facility. (Rev. 2) In process: Water resources comments conveyed to Applicant (two items) via email March 3, 2023 10:13 AM, with 1 item sent February 16, 2023 2:55 PM. • (photo A) Avoid replacing 18" DIA pipe, since this pipe is 12'-14' below grade. The ex. extended detention basin is stable at pipe inlet, replacing 18" w/ 15" DIA will likely de -stabilize. Can achieve same or better effect with Alt. design (riser w/floor at 18" inlet). (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `The design has been updated in general accordance with what is described here.' • (photo B) Alt. design: MH-sec. riser with low -flow /mid -flow orifice, or weir plate, with trash rack top, to achieve energy balance /10-yr flood protection downstream of Ex. basin. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `The design has been updated in general accordance with what is described here.' • Please report 100-yr WSE in ex. basin —if routing is overlooked in calc. packet, please direct me to it (.PDF p. 4). (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `100-year WSE, 478.14', has been added to the plans and calculations. The project causes a rise in the 100-year storm where two -feet of freeboard is no longer available. The berm ahs been proposed to be raised to maintain two -feet of freeboard.' • (photo C) Albemarle requests evaluation of slope embankment stability upslope of Playful Learners. SWM detention basin has no overland relief. (Rev. 2) Partially addressed. Applicant: `A geotechnical evaluation is being conducted and will be provided prior to approval, but is not included with this submittal.' As follow-up: Not required for WPO plan approval but geotechnical evaluation is required prior to final site plan (ESP) approval, as prerequisite to ESP approval —also, please see review item 5. above. • (photo D) Facility currently does not stage, rather watershed runoff simply transits existing detention basin (Kegler's) with marginal /no detention. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `It was noted in follow-up conversations the basin hasn't been observed during heavy rainfall so staging is really unknown.' • Confirm design is based upon actual As -built field survey of Kegler's. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `Confirmed. Volumes used are based on as -built information.' • (photo E) Provide riprap throughout existing incised channel/s, within basin. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `Riprap has been added to the channel as discussed.' • (photo F) Preserve /protect slope, stone /bedrock in vicinity of 18" pipe inlet. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `Noted, design has been updated based on additional conversations.' Engineering Review Comments Page 7 of 9 (photo G) Provide riprap from Kegler's to point of discharge from Berkmar self -storage parcel, TMP 04500-00-00-11200, it must be a manmade channel all the way. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `Rpprap has been added to the channel as discussed.' (photo B) Improved trash collection; example: `kennel' chain link enclosure, concrete slab with downturn to limit heave ris collection typ. of this facility (plastic, bottles, debris). (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `Trash collection has been improved based on follow-up email on 1/31/23.' Improved acc, , ex. detention basin interior. (Rev. 2) Addressed. Applicant: `The previous low point is proposed to be backfrlled to eliminate the steep slopes down to the outfall pipe as per follow-up discussions.' New /Rev. 2: 10. C8.1: Add label to Stirs. 114, 132 for %:" steel plate in Stir. floor since INV IN-IW OU :> 4'. Ref. VDOT Drainage Design Manual, 9.4.8.7. 11. C8.0: Add label to Stir. 124 for %:" steel plate in Str. floor since INV IN-INV OUT> 4'. 12. C6.3 Proposed changes to pond structures detail: Revise proposed 13 LF 18" Orifice HDPE to RCP pipe material, with label or note stating pipe material substitution is impermissible. 13. Please compare Ex. 24" RCP INV OUT elev. 456.6' (C2.2) with proposed 18" orifice INV IN elev. 457.87' C( 6.3I. Revise design to proposed (or existing 24" RCP) to ensure Min. 1% slope between outfall of ex. 24" RCP and INV IN 18" orifice. Note: Amendment to WPO to address in more efficient design manner is an option, if, in the interim, it is tenable to show /elevate ex. 24" RCP pipe INV OUT. — Note: this item discussed /Anderson -Bolton, 3/3/23.] FROM C2.2: \ 482 i 474 i % SDMH 470 � d �e a % �RCP 2 \ / - 464 ti( _ �J \ 96q \ \ a60 J J a60 456 453.6' RISER APPROX. DIRECTION -I RCP 18 0 RP /) 462 a / 464.6' SDMI 464.0' RCP RCP 24 ,� D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP. This plan is approved, but please seefollow- u request at item 2.b., below. C3.0 a. Indicates 4.74 Ac. limits of disturbance. VAR10 registration statement indicates 5.44 LOD. Please revise plan or registration statement for consistency /accuracy. (Rev. 1) Addressed. LOD revised to 5.00 Ac. across plan, calculations and VAR10 Registration Statement. 2. C3.2 a. Both sediment traps lie immediately adjacent to a developed property to the south (Harvest Moon). Provide additional ST2 dry storage capacity. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `Adequate dry storage capacity is provided per VESCH. If construction site conditions require a field change based on reviewer's comment 2.b., we will work with the County ESC inspector to rectify any issues that might come up in the field. ST2 is strategically located as to not interfere with the Engineering Review Comments Page 8 of 9 construction of the Self Storage facility.' As follow-up: Please label ST2, and show weir outfall stone, C3.3 (Rev. 2) Addressed. b. Recommend provide additional STl wet/dry storage capacity. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Applicant: `The storage provided for STl is more than required by code. As mentioned above, if field conditions dictate a change, we will work with the County ESC inspector to rectify the problem.' Note: An incident release of sediment -laden site runoff will route thru ex. detention basin and may affect ponds in residential areas downstream of the detention basin located E of U.S. Rt. 29 (Carrsbrook subdivision), a circumstance to avoid via design. One way is to increase volume of temporary sediment traps. c. Pipe 119 leaves MH Str. 104 at an acute angle. Revise pipe -to -ME design (90-deg, Min.). (Rev. 1) Addressed. d. Provide double row SF or fence -backed ("super" silt fence) between sediment traps and Harvest Moon (HG Land, LLC) to the south. (Rev. 1) Addressed. e. Label sediment trap floor dimensions (L x W). (Rev. 1) Addressed. 3. Provide interim `Mass grade' ESC plan, a stage intermediate to Phase 1 and Phase 2 (between C3.2, C3.3). Phase 1, C3.2, shows no grading, Phase 2, C3.3, shows complete build -out, and traps removed. Depict ESC measures required to prevent off -site sediment transport as site is brought to grade, as improvements are constructed. This may entail smaller traps, or traps in multiple locations. Also, a primary focus of interim ESC measures is to avoid discharge of sediment -laden runoff to Harvest Moon or to ex. dry detention basin from SW quadrant of Berkmar Self -Storage tract, shown as graded turf at completion. (Rev. 1) Addressed. 4. Point of Int. with Berkmar Drive is of special concern, provide interim ESC design to ensure no tracking of mud or sediment onto Berkmar Drive as grading /building and parking lot construction proceed. (Rev. 1) Addressed, 5. Depict /provide ESC .,aFT-at:vp. for right turn lane from Berkmar Dr. Depict right turn lane ESC measures. (Rev. 1) Addressed. 6. Provide and label ESC measures between proposed 10' asphalt sidewalk and Berkmar Drive. (Rev. 1) Addressed. Silt fence has been added on Sheets C3.2 — C3.4. 7. C3.3 a. Provide SF between site and Keglers to east to extend from cut /fill transition (contour 494') to SE comer of parcel. (Rev. 1) Addressed. b. Provide RWD at 482' (f) and /or appropriate ESC measures to prevent runoff reaching U.S. Rt. 29 until relatively steep 40' pvt. ROW between site and Rt. 29 is paved (25' width). (Rev. 1) Addressed, 8. C4.0 a. SW quadrant of site (layout and utility plan) shows existing grade, inconsistent with proposed grade shown on C3.3. Revise C4.0 to show proposed final grade. (Rev. 1) NA. Applicant: `Grading is not shown on C4.0 to provide clarity for layout dimensions and labels. All grading, storm network, and utilities are shown on Sheet C5.0.' 9. C5.0 a. 40' pvt. ROW includes an existing gravel road half the width (or less) of proposed final 25' paved width. Ex. drainage with respect to U.S. Rt. 29 is unclear, but final condition proposes to tie new 25' wide pavement with existing paved road that then continues and connects with U.S. Rt. 29. Provide /show drainage /storm conveyance for this 25' paved connection between Berkmar Self - Storage and U.S. Rt. 29, design should prevent runoff from this facility entering U.S. Rt. 29. (Rev. 1) Addressed. b. Recommend different hatching for cemetery zone since hatching may be misinterpreted as proposed grading across a cemetery. (Rev. 1) Addressed. c. Recommend paved walk /stairs between 9 parking spaces located on 25' paved road (40' pvt. ROW) and 4-story self -storage since use of slope without a designated pedestrian facility may direct sediment -laden runoff immediately to DI 112, and thence to ex. dry detention basin. (Rev. 1) Withdrawn. Applicant: `It is unlikely that the Storage facility customers will park in those Engineering Review Comments Page 9 of 9 spaces since they are overflow for the hotel. Parking for the Storage facility is provided in front of the building and not expected to exceed 8 spaces provided.' `Next Steps' after WPO plan approval 1. Purchase Nutrient Credits (5.00 Ar. 4441b.. 5.19 lb. nutrient credit purchase required) a. Please coordinate with the County reviewer before working with Ivy Creek nutrient bank only. [The reviewer has confirmed this bank must provide credits to meet DEQ hierarchy requirements. ] b. Letter of availability must be provided on the WPO approved plans. (Rev. 2) Addressed. c. Applicant must contact/coordinate nutrient purchase with Ana Kilmer, akilmerAalbemarle.org. d. Affidavit of Purchase must be provided to Ana Kilmer before a grading permit can be issued. 2. Post WPO Bond a. Applicant must submit a `Request to Establish a Bond' forrn and fee to CDD. i. Complete the form and email it to akilmer(a),albemarle.org, along with proof of payment (see below). b. Payment can be made either online or with a check. i. If paying online: 1. Go to the online payment portal. a. Select WPONSMP as the application `type.' b. Type in the WPO number and project name in the Notes/Details section of the form. C. Type in the `payment amount' as $294.34. d. Click "Proceed to Secure Checkout" link to make payment. 2. You will receive a receipt in an email. ii. Email a copy of the receipt to akilmerkalbemarle.org. c. Once the bond request and payment are received, the applicant can provide the bond estimate (completed on the County worksheet), or Engineering staff will complete the estimate. Once the estimate is approved, Ana Kilmer will contact and work with the applicant to post the bond. (Rev. 2) Engineering staff will prepare WPO plan bond estimate, 3/3/23, transmit to Ms. Kilmer, and notify Applicant once Amt. sent to Ana. Obtain DEQ Permit (LOD > 1 Ac.) After nutrient credits have been purchased and the bond has been posted: a. County staff will register the project with DEQ. b. Applicantloperator listed on the Registration Statement will receive an email with instructions on how to pay the DEQ permit fee. c. Applicant must email a copy of the DEQ receipt of payment to charris6dnalbemarle.org. d. DEQ typically will issue a permit within 2 weeks of receiving payment. 4. Request pre -construction meeting: a. Complete and email the Request for a Preconstruction Meeting and Grading Permit to charris(a,)albemarle.org. b. Pay the fee via the online payment portal or a check at the pre -construction meeting. If paid online, email a copy of the receipt to charris e albemarle.org. All steps must be completed before the grading permit can be issued. County forms can be found on the county website forms center under Engineering Applications: hfi)s: //www.albemarle. org/government/community-development/al)ply-for/engineering-applications Thank you. Please call if any questions — tel. 434.296-5832-0069, or email ianderson2(c�r�albemarle.org. WP0202200032_Berkmar self storage _VSMP_030323rev2