HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800078 Review Comments Preliminary Site Plan 2008-06-03*-&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Lisa Glass, Current Development Project Planner
From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review
Date: 03 June 2008
Subject: Montalto Restoration (SDP- 2008 - 00078)
The preliminary site plan for the Montalto restoration project has been reviewed. The following comments
are provided:
1. The applicant will need to submit an application for a WPO plan when the final site plan is
submitted. A preliminary assessment of the SWM concept plan has been performed with the
preliminary site plan review.
2. Engineering review realizes that the impervious area around the existing house and barn
structures in the post - development condition is nearly equal to the pre - development condition and
will not require SWM quality treatment in this area. SWM treatment and detention will be
required for the parking lots to the south of the site where new impervious area is added over
grass. Please provide treatment measures in this area that meet or exceed the required removal rate
computed using the county's modified simple spreadsheet. Please contact me if you need a copy
of this spreadsheet.
3. Please note on the plan the date of the topographic and utility survey. The survey does not
appear to accurately show the existing entrance onto Route 53. A blowup of this entrance should
be provided in the plan showing adequate sight distance.
4. The plan has been designed to parameters less stringent than the standards listed in the County
ordinance. It is unclear what design standards were waived during the rezoning process and what
were left to be waived administratively. The waivers needed are:
a. [18- 4.12.15.a] Surface materials.
b. [18- 4.12.15.c] Maximum grade in parking lot.
c. [18- 4.12.15.g] Curb and gutter.
d. [18- 4.12.16.c.1] Minimum parking space size and aisle widths.
e. [18- 4.12.16.e] Bumper blocks.
f. [18- 4.12.17.a] Maximum grade for a travelway.
g. [18- 4.12.17.c.I] Travelway width.
An engineering analysis of the pending waivers is as follows:
a. [18- 4.12.15.a] Details for each modification from standard asphalt paving should be
included before a waiver is granted. Details were not included in this set.
b. [18- 4.12.15.c] It appears that the 5% maximum grade can easily be achieved in most
locations.
c. [18- 4.12.15.g] Stormwater runoff is always more efficiently transferred with curbing.
d. [18- 4.12.16.c.1] Room is available for the expansion of the travelway in the southwest
Current Development
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
parking lot to the standard in the County Code.
e. [18- 4.12.16.e] Bumper blocks should be provided in parking spaces adjacent to
sidewalk that is narrower than 6ft.
f. [18- 4.12.17.a] All travelways that exceed the maximum grade requirement are existing
travelways on the "farm road ". All existing travelways appear to have grades
shallower than the maximum allowable slope that can be traversed by emergency
access vehicles. Though, this cannot be confirmed until a survey of the entry road is
provided in this set. Engineering review recommends approval of this waiver if some
additional safety barricades are proposed and topographical information on the entry
road is given in the set.
g. [18- 4.12.17.c.1] Travelway widths are difficult to confirm for the farm road from
Route 53 because it is not shown in this plan. All two -way traffic is recommended by
engineering review to be at least 20ft in width.
The following comments are final plan comments that do not have to be addressed with this preliminary
review but may be helpful to the applicant in the development of the preliminary and concept plans.
1. A guardrail is required for all travelways and parking areas adjacent to a wall of 4ft in height
or taller.
2. Please provide typical details for all retaining walls.
3. A handrail is needed for all walls 4ft or taller.
4. Adequate channel analyses will be required for all concentrated flow discharge points.
File: El_psp_sdp200800007.doc