HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200900077 Review Comments Minor Amendment 2009-09-30vIRGIN�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Yaniglos, Senior Planner
From: Amy Pflaum, Engineering Review
Division: Current Development
Date: September 29, 2009
Subject: SDP200900077, Flow Auto Minor Amendment
The site plan minor amendment for the Flow Automotive, submitted on September 14, 2009, has been
reviewed. Current Development Engineering can recommend approval once the following comments have
been addressed:
General Site Plan Comments
1. Amendment Rev 1: The approved site plan showed curbing along the eastern property line
abutting the parallel parking spaces. It is unclear if that curbing is still on the plan.
2. Amendment Rev 2: The parking in the front abutting Rte. 250 has been revised from angled to
perpendicular. Perpendicular parking of 9 -feet in width requires a 24 -foot travelway, alternatively,
a 20 -foot travelway requires abutting perpendicular parking to be 10 -feet in width. A waiver of
this requirement must be requested and approved. [18- 4.12.16.c.1]
3. Amendment Rev 1: The approved site plan showed a stub -out (inter - parcel connection) to TMP
78 -14. It is unclear if this stub -out remains in this plan.
4. Amendment Rev 3: If the previously approved stub -out to TMP 78 -14 is required, the striped
parking island in this area should be restored to raised concrete.
5. Amendment Rev 5: The minimum dimensions of a dumpster pad are 18' deep by 10' wide. The
amended dumpster pad does not appear to meet this requirement. [18- 4.12.19]
6. Amendment Rev 5: It is difficult to determine how the new location of the dumpsters may affect
traffic flow in the travelway to TMP 78 -14D because the curb that outlined the travelway on the
approved site plan is not shown on this plan.
7. The stormwater facility labels on Sheet S -2 are identical in shape and size to the revision labels
making it difficult to discern which are indicating revisions. Shading of the stormwater labels may
be appropriate.
8. Although the previously approved Sheet S -5 is included, an amended version has not been
submitted.
9. Amendment Rev 4: Please place revision bubbles around the amended Drainage Area acreages on
Sheet DP -1.
10. Amendment Rev 4: Although Inlet 12 has been amended to a manhole, no grading amendment is
being shown in this location. It is unclear how stormwater from the former Area Str. 12, which is
sheet - flowing, will be captured by Inlet 12B.
11. Amendment Rev 4: The amended profile view of Str. 12 on Sheet DP -2 continues to show a
raised curb situation.
12. Amendment Rev 4: Please provide an amended profile of Pipe 12A.
13. The profile of Str. 21 - Str. 19 was not included on the approved Sheet DP -2. Is this part of the
amendment?
14. Amendment Rev 4: On Sheet DP -3 the rim elevation of Str. 6 has been amended, however, there
has been no amendment of grading or curbing in its location. No change has been shown to the
rim elevation of Str. 12, which is being amended from an inlet in a raised island to a manhole in
the asphalt. Please clarify.
15. Amendment Rev 4: There are many unidentified differences between the Storm Sewer
Computations and Drainage Descriptions on the approved Sheet DP -3 and the amended version.
Please note and explain all differences. Once again, Str. 19 & 21 are on the amended sheet, but
are not on the previously approved plan.
Stormwater Management Comments
16. The.
\ \Cob- dts01 \cityviewlnk\Docs \2009 \SDP \SDP200900077 Flow Auto- Minor Amendment \CDE1_mia_ADP_ 09 -00077 Flow_Minor.doc