HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201100059 Review Comments Stormwater Management Plan 2011-10-04ALg�,��
�'IRGINZ�
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
Project: Stonefield Town Center SWM and Site Plan; WPO- 2011 -00059 & SDP - 2011 -00054
Plan preparer: Mr. Herb White, PE; W & W Associates
Owner or rep.: Albemarle Place EAAP LLC
Date received: 11 August 2011
Date of Comment: 4 October 2011
Engineer: Phil Custer
The SWM and site plans for Stonefield Town Center (WPO- 2011 -00059 and SDP - 2011 - 00054), received
on 11 August 2011, have been reviewed. The plans can be approved after the following comments have
been addressed:
A. Stormwater Management Review Comments
1. Please provide an approval letter from Filterra that the current layout is acceptable to them. I have
concerns with a few of the structures not operating well in the field. For instance, the water
running in the curb uphill of structure 104.1 would have to reverse direction in order for the
Filterra to operate efficiently. A smaller facility on the curb line farther south of Inlet 104 should
be looked at.
2. What is the minimum cover required on the roof drain collection lines to the Filterras located in
the middle of parking islands? Are the loads these pipes are going to encounter in the parking lot
acceptable?
3. Please provide a cross - section detail for crowned gutter pan between the two sets of paired filterras
(82.1 & 82.2 and 81.1 & 81.2).
4. This application will require that a new Stormwater Management Facility Maintenance Agreement
be recorded. Please complete this form and submit it to Ana Kilmer with a $17 recordation fee
after reading the instructions online. Please include all parcels contained in this site plan on this
agreement.
5. Please provide a completed Bond Estimate Request Form to the county engineer to receive an
SWM bond.
B. Site Plan Review Comments
The Director of Planning, in his response to the applicant's variation request during the
preliminary site plan, stated that Stonefield Blvd. is acceptable as the development's only public
street but is subject to the review under applicable ordinance provisions. While private streets in
the commercial districts can normally be approved administratively, this cannot be done when the
private street connects two public streets [14- 234.C.4], as New Main Street is currently doing. If
New Main Street is made a public street, then Swanson would be violating this ordinance
provision in a similar manner. Because of this restriction on private streets, it is my opinion that
the private road network will need to be authorized by the Planning Commission (or a
modification to Wayne's variation letter citing Table II could eliminate the need for Planning
Commission review). This was a condition of preliminary site plan approval. The final
interpretation of this variance and how the private street standards are applied to the streets of this
development will be made by the Chief of Current Development who is performing the Planning
Review of this project.
2. A boundary line adjustment plat appears to be necessary to eliminate or modify lot lines that bisect
buildings before a site plan is approved. Otherwise, a firewall would need to be constructed on the
property line.
3. The plan does not appear consistent with the application plan in that there is no park area in front
of the hotel. The application plan clearly showed a park area in Block D that was designated as
"Congregation Area" that was "intended to serve as the core public activity zone within the
project ", but this final site plan seems to show an isolated lawn area that is closed off completely
by shrubs. These areas were designated as "parks" in the preliminary site plan that the Director of
Planning reviewed when considering the variation for the site layout. Please make both of these
Green Spaces usable parks.
4. To be consistent with the variation granted by the Director of Planning on 5/16/2011, all tree wells
and planting strips must be at least 5 feet in width.
5. To be consistent with the variation granted by the Director of Planning on 5/16/2011, please
remove the perpendicular parking spaces on Inglewood.
6. The County Engineer has approved the waiver of curb and gutter on Main Street in the area shown
by the applicant. This approval is conditioned on keeping water flowing out of the travelway and
in the parking space that a more traditional cross - section achieves with a curb. However, because
of the flat grades, there needs to be a greater delineation between the parking portion of the cross -
section and the sidewalk. Please provide planter boxes, street furniture, and bollards along the
street in similar spacing that was shown in the exhibits of other curbless streets located throughout
the country that were provided to the county when the waiver was requested by the applicant.
I understand why the trench drains were placed at tree well locations, but I am concerned that a
frequent flow of water may washout the mulch and other debris from these boxes and may clog the
system in the future. Is there any way to mitigate this concern with the design? Perhaps each
trench drain could be moved just upstream of the planter box or 6inch curbs (or greater to allow
for seating) could be installed around each tree well.
7. Please provide a sidewalk around the east side of Building A -III. [18- 32.7.2.8]
8. Please extend the curbing into an island at the end of the parking row west of Building A -I enough
to protect the vehicle parked at the end of the row. [18- 4.12.15.f]
9. Please locate the concrete island north of Building B -II —40ft to the west so that it lines up with the
concrete walkway between buildings. [18- 32.7.2.8]
10. Please provide pedestrian connections from Hydraulic Road into the southeastern parking lots by
Building A -I and Building AN. [18- 32.7.2.8]
11. Please provide more spot elevations along Swanson Ave. This road is fairly flat and it's difficult
to tell where the intended watersheds for each structure end.
12. The standard duty pavement provided in most of the parking lots looks to be acceptable for
approximately 1000 vehicles a day according to the VDOT pavement design manual. The heavy
duty pavement in the hotel lot can handle approximately 3000 vehicles a day. It's likely that many
of the travelways within the parking lot will experience more than 1000 vehicles a day. Please use
heavy duty pavement along primary travelways within the parking lots, especially areas where
truck delivery and dumpster removal routes are expected. [18- 4.12.15.a]
13. Please provide more stop signs within the parking lots to allow the primary travelways freer flow.
In particular, the areas of the parking lots with wide curves for truck traffic need the most
attention.
14. Please show the potential extension of First Street without any horizontal curves. If this road is to
ever be constructed, it's not logical that any future re- developer of these duplex properties would
use up space with a horizontal curve.
15. Please show a profile of Second Street to confirm that a connection can be made to
Commonwealth Drive per Proffer 13. Similar to the comment made regarding the profile of First
Street, show this as a straight connection with as few horizontal curves as possible.
16. Where is the low point in the exit of Main Street onto Route 29? Is the spot elevation 77.55 the
low point? It appears that another inlet may be necessary to prevent concentrated water from
flowing across this travel lane.
17. Please remove Note 4 on Sheet C -28 and replace it with a callout of the product number of the
grate. The grate type is critical to the adequacy of the drainage system. It appears as though
Product #12.504G.FB has been specified.
18. Please provide a sample written out calculation for the trench drains on grade in the tables on the
right of C -23. [18- 4.12.15.b]
19. Bumper blocks are needed in parking spaces where there is no curb. [18- 4.12.16.e]
20. Please show all sight distance lines as they had been approved on the preliminary site plan with
regard to geometry and required distances.
21. Street furniture must be shown on all streets required by Appendix B of the Code of Development.
Location and frequency of street furniture must be approved by county staff.
22. Where is "Main Street Alley" located on site?
23. Please provide typical retaining wall details in the set. The detail should include a handrail since
many of the walls are greater than 4ft tall.
24. The detectable warning surface along the curbless section of Main Street must be 2ft wide to be
compliant with ADA standards.
File: E1_swm fsp_PBC _ wpo- 2011 -00059 sdp- 2011 -00054 Stonefield Town Center.doc