HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO200900067 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2010-09-22� OF AL
,. vIRGI1`IZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
Project: North Pointe Northern Entrance Route 29 Improvements [WPO- 2009 - 00067]
Plan preparer: David Jensen, PE; WW Associates
Owner or rep.: Richard Spurzem; Neighborhood Investments — NP LLC
Plan received date: 25 November 2009
(Rev. 1) 11 August 2010
Date of comments: 16 December 2009
(Rev. 1) 22 September 2010
Reviewer: Phil Custer
The first revision to the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for the North Pointe Northern Entrance Route
29 Improvements project, submitted on 11 August 2010, has been reviewed. The following comments
must be addressed before approval of the set is given:
A. General Review/Road Comments
1. VDOT approval of the road plan is required. At this time, VDOT approval has not yet been
received.
(Rev. 1) VDOT approval has not yet been received.
2. The Chief of Zoning has determined that the additional fill shown within the floodplain in the
latest plan, compared to the sketch designed by DDR for SP- 2006 - 00034, will not require an
amendment to the SP.
3. This set will need to be coordinated with the North Pointe Stream Crossing Plan (WPO -2009-
00061). Does this plan assume that the stream crossing plan will be fully constructed? In the area
of the proposed work shown on the stream crossing plan, please provide a note referring to the
stream crossing plan with independent limits of construction. The construction information (plans,
profiles, cross - sections, etc.) for Northwest Passage (aka Lewis and Clark Dr.) will need to be
included in the stream crossing set.
(Rev. 1) In step I of the construction sequence, please state that a grading permit cannot be
given for this project until the Stream Crossing ESC Plan (WPO- 2009 - 00061) is sufficiently
constructed. Please also correct the WPO application number in step 2.
4. A handrail is needed for the retaining wall in all locations where the height is taller than 4ft. [DM]
(Rev. 1) Comment has been addressed.
The following comments should overlap with VDOT's review. Any discrepancy between county
and VDOT comments should be discussed further.
5. Many slopes within the ROW are shown as steeper than 2:1. Albemarle County review
recommends that these slopes be flattened out to at least 2:1, though 3:1 is preferable. Particularly,
steep grades are currently proposed around structures 1, 2, and 5. This is not a requirement.
(Rev. 1) This issue is to be worked out with VDOT.
6. The bike lanes on Lewis and Clark Drive (a.k.a. Northwest Passage) must be at least 4ft to the
edge of the concrete CG -6.
Albemarle County Community Development
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
(Rev. 1) Comment has been withdrawn.
This comment has been provided as a reminder to the applicant of Proffer 5.3. l.c. l .v. If not
already constructed, the applicant "shall add the fourth leg to the signal, which shall include
additional mast arms, signal heads, and ancillary equipment necessary to support Northwest
Passage's use of the intersection as determined by VDOT." This work must be included in either
this set or the final site plan set. At the time that the signal work is proposed, the applicant must
also address Proffer 5.3.3 by providing traffic signal timing plans to VDOT.
(Rev. 1) This will be verified by the county immediately prior to site plan approval.
A plat for the dedication of additional ROW may be needed for a maintenance area beneath the
retaining wall if requested by VDOT.
(Rev. 1) VDOT has informed me that 10ft from the face of the wall will be required for
maintenance. I will include this as a comment on SUB - 2010 - 00099.
The stone walls outside of the sidewalk on Lewis and Clark Dr. (a.k.a. Northwest Passage) should
be within ROW and maintained by VDOT because the walls are acting as a guardrail. This stone
wall should be comparable to standard GR -2 with regard to the impacts it can withstand.
!Rev. 1) Comment has been addressed. The stone walls have been removed.
B. ESC Plan Review Comments
1. Please provide an assessment of all pipe outlets to Flat Branch. The assessment should include
photographic documentation of the outlets and analysis of the 2 -year storm for scouring. (MS -19)
(Rev. 1) Please see the following comment.
2. The ESC measures provided do not appear to exceed the minimum state requirements. (Proffer
4.3.a) For a list of recommended measures above and beyond state minimum requirements, please
refer to the County Engineer's Commentary # 3. Engineering review recommends that the
applicant consider the use of a third party ESC inspector and committing to an accelerated
construction schedule for the retaining wall and eastern slope adjacent to the right turn lane off of
Route 29 northbound.
(Rev. 1) Engineering review will consider Proffer 4.3.a addressed if the applicant adds a note in
the area of the 18 "pipe outfall that states if County personnel feel it is necessary, the contractor
will provide Class AI riprap from the wall to the perennial stream.
Please also show the BIM symbol on the 2:1 slopes above the retaining wall. Engineering
review will consider this proposal as a measure that exceeds minimum state requirements.
3. Please provide the latest edition of the county's erosion and sediment control notes. These notes
can be found in the design manual, available online.
(Rev. 1) Comment has been addressed.
4. Please add a note to the ESC plan that the contractor is to coordinate ESC measures at the point of
overlap between this plan and the stream crossing ESC plan (WPO- 2009 - 00061).
(Rev. 1) Comment has been addressed. This note has been added.
5. The ESC bond will be computed at the time of plan approval.
(Rev. 1) The ESC bond has been computed to be $73,100.
E2_esc_rp_PBC_North Pointe Northern Entrance 29 Itnprovetnents_wpo200900067.doc