HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201200023 Review Comments Preliminary Site Plan 2012-06-21Christopher Perez
From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT) [ Joel .DeNunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 9:13 AM
To: Christopher Perez
Cc: Philip Custer
Subject: RE: SDP2012 -23 Whitewood Road Daycare Center
Chris,
The new sight line going to the middle of the approach lane in the closest intersection is fine.
Thanks
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
VDOT Culpeper
Land Development
434 - 589 -5871
Joel. den unzioC�vdot.virainia.gov
From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez(a)albemarle.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 8:48 AM
To: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT)
Cc: Philip Custer
Subject: SDP2012 -23 Whitewood Road Daycare Center
Joel,
I am looking for something in writing from you, which can be an email that confirms what Frank is saying (see below
email): that you're good with the revision they submitted (see attached), which shows the new sight line.
Thanks
From: Frank Pohl [mailto :frank @pohlconsultingllc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 5:35 PM
To: Christopher Perez
Cc: 'Carl Schwarz'; 'Kurt Keesecker'; 'Nat Perkins'
Subject: FW: Overhangs in Site Setbacks
Chris,
I spoke with Joel and he is good to go with the revision I submitted, which shows the sight line to the center of the
oncoming vehicle. Please confirm we do not need to submit a waiver for the insignificant buffer clip.
Also, if you can, please refer below to the email from the architect. Can you verify if this is the case concerning roof
overhangs and other overhangs in setbacks?
Thank you again Chris!
Frank
Frank V. Pohl, PE, LEED AP BD +c
Pohl Consulting, LLC
1603 Kenwood Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22901
434 - 466 -7458
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:52 AM
To: Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Subject: SDP2012 -23 Whitewood Road Daycare Center
Joel,
Frank has provided a revised sight distance line on Oak Forest Drive. Is this acceptable/ will it suffice as shown?
Please review and let Phil and I know.
Thanks
Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3443
From: Frank Pohl [ mailto :frank(a)pohlconsultingllc.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 4:44 PM
To: Christopher Perez; Philip Custer
Cc: nat.perkins gmail.com
Subject: RE: SDP2012 -23 Whitewood Road Daycare Center
Christopher /Phil,
Attached please find a response letter and a revised layout plan addressing your comments. Since the comments are
similar and so minor, please let me know if you can review this PDF before I make copies and resubmit. Otherwise, I will
send this to the printer in the morning and bring in hard copies for you tomorrow. I know I will need to resubmit
originals with my signature, and possibly a revised cover sheet with today's revision date. Just let me know either way.
Thank you!
Frank
Frank V. Pohl, PE, LEED AP BD +C
Pohl Consulting, LLC
1603 Kenwood Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22901
434 - 466 -7458
From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez(a)albemarle.orq]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 2:01 PM
To: Frank Pohl
Cc: nat.perkins gmail.com
Subject: SDP2012 -23 Whitewood Road Daycare Center
Frank,
I finally received all of the comments from each reviewer ... I have provided them in the attached letter.
Please let me know how you wish to proceed. Thank you
Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3443
fi
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Frank Pohl
From: Christopher P. Perez- Senior Planner
Division: Zoning & Current Development
Date: June 18, 2012
Subject: SDP201200023 Whitewood Road (Day Care Center) - Preliminary Site Plan
The Planner for the Current Development Division of the Albemarle County Department
Community Development will recommend approve the plan referred to above when the following
items have been satisfactorily addressed. (The following comments are those that have been
identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added. or eliminated based on
further review.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference to the Albemarle County
Code.]
1. [Comment] At the entrance of Oak Forest Drive it appears that a portion of the sight distance
line is depicted as penetrating the 20' undisturbed buffer area. In order to. continue as
shown a waiver to disturb this area would need to be applied for and approved. If this is
not your intent and you wish to redesign the intersection so that the sight line is out of the
buffer, I will have no objection to making that a condition of preliminary site plan approval as
long as VDOT is ok with the proposal (let me know how you wish to proceed).
2. [Comment] At the entrance of Oak Forest Drive it- appears that a portion of the sight distance
line is depicted on TM 61 W 1 Parcel OA-38. Does a sight distance easement exist for this; if
so provide its recordation information, otherwise an easement will need to be granted. If this
is not your intent and you wish to redesign the intersection so that the sight line is out of the
adjacent owners property, I will have no objection to making that a condition of preliminary
site plan approval as long as VDOT is ok with the proposal (let me know how you wish to
proceed).
3. [Comment] If it is desired by the applicant, Fire and Rescue's comments (which are provided
below) can be a condition of preliminary site plan approval.
4. [Comment] A request for critical slopes waiver has been received and has been reviewed by
the County, we have no objections to the roposal and plan to send it to the BOS for action
on their consent agenda at- their July 11 ' meeting. The approval of this waiver can be a
condition of preliminary site plan approval.
Engineering —Phil Custer
Two comments remain, see the attached comment letter from Phil Custer.
Fire and Rescue Comments Robbie Gilmer
1. Hydrant spacing Shall be 400 ft per travel way.
2. Free standing FDC on the address side of the building within 50 ft of a hydrant. The FDC shall
have a sign red back ground white letters marking the FDC.
VDOT Comments — Joel DeNunzio
No objections
E911— Andrew Slack
No objections
Building Inspections — Jay Schlothauer
No objections
ACSA — Alex Morrison
No Objections
Please contact Christopher P. Perez at the Department of Community Development 296-
5832 ext. 3443 for further information.
*—&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Christopher Perez, Project Planner
From: Phil Custer, Engineering Review
Date: 15 June 2012
Subject: Whitewood Road (Day Care Center) Preliminary Site Plan (SDP- 2012 - 00023)
The 2 °d submittal of the preliminary site plan for the Day Care Center on Whitewood Road has been
reviewed. Engineering review can recommend approval to the preliminary site plan after the following
comments have been addressed.
1. The undisturbed buffer is shown as being disturbed at the entrance onto Oak Forest Drive. On the
next submittal, please modify the plan to stop grading at the 20ft buffer line or provide a letter
requesting permission for the disturbance. [18- 21.7.c]
(Rev. 1) The grading has been revised to prevent disturbance to the undisturbed buffer, but
slopes steeper than 2:1 are shown as proposed. The grading will need to be revised in the final
site plan so that no slopes steeper than 2:1 are proposed.
2. When travelways are 20ft in width, perpendicular parking spaces must be IOft in width. [18-
4.12.16.c.1]
(Rev. I) Comment has been addressed.
3. Please show the sight distance triangle for the entrance onto Oak Forest Drive. Will selective
clearing at the east end of the undisturbed buffer be necessary to establish a sight line? If so, a
waiver to disturb the buffer must be granted. [18- 4.12.17.b, 18- 32.5.6.s]
(Rev. 1) The sight line for this intersection has been added as requested and it travels through
the undisturbed buffer. Clearing of limbs and small undergrowth to establish (or maintain)
sight distance is prohibited by I8 -21.7. To design a site plan that relies on a sight line through
an undisturbed buffer, the authority must be given by the county to the parcel owner to clear
existing or future vegetation to maintain a safe sight line. Otherwise, the entrance will be
unsafe. The applicant must request a waiver for buffer disturbance and have it approved by the
Board of Supervisors or modify the entrance in such a way that the sight line does not travel
through the buffer.
4. Please detail on the plan what must be done to provide adequate sight distance at the entrance onto
Whitewood Road. Any approval will be conditioned on obtaining safe sight lines for this
intersection. [18- 4- 12.17.b, 18- 32.5.6.s]
(Rev. 1) Comment has been addressed.
The following are final site plan comments that are provided for the applicant's information.
These do not need to be addressed prior to preliminary approval but include things engineering
staff will comment on in the final plan submittal.
(Rev. 1) The below comments were for informational purposes only.
5. Bumper blocks will be required on the parking spaces south of the building or a 6ft sidewalk,
exclusive of the 6" curb, will be required. [18- 4.12.16.e]
6. The dumpster pad will need to be expanded so that there is at least 8ft in front of the dumpster.
The grading in the area will be more closely examined to make sure the gutter does not direct
runoff across the pad. [18- 4.12.19]
Current Development
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
7. Guardrail will likely be required above the retaining wall on the west side of the site for the
travelway on TMP 61 -26. [18- 32.7.2.8]
8. The two filterra units treating the parking lot have been proposed with unusual alignments that
appear to likely provide substandard treatment. Please look at providing more traditional
alignment along the curblines without the addition of concrete flumes. A DI -313 may be required
south of the Rising Redbud to minimize runoff into the public street anyway. [17- 315.A, 18-
4.12.15.b]
9. A manhole to provide access into underground detention systems is required at both ends.
10. It is recommended that the retaining wall north of the 12 western parking spaces is flared at least
two feet to allow passengers to exit the vehicle as easily as they would in a normal spot.
File: E2_psp_sdp201200023 Whitewood Road Preliminary Site Plan.doc
`J I1 pJ11 �11'] �J, r, �) ifilly
Service Authority
TO: Christopher Perez
FROM: Alexander J. Morrison, EIT, Civil Engineer
DATE: May 15, 2012
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: SDP - 2012 - 00023: Whitewood Road (Day Care Center)
Preliminary Site Plan
TMP # 0610- 00- 00- 026A0; Lot B
The below checked items apply to
this site.
✓ 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for:
✓
A. Water and sewer
B. Water only
C. Water only to existing structure
D. Limited service
✓
2.
An 8 inch water line is located approximately on site distant.
3.
Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is
Gpm + at 20 psi residual.
✓
4.
An 8 inch sewer line is located approximately on site distant.
5.
An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed.
✓
6.
No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future
easements.
7.
and plans are currently under review.
8.
and plans have been received and approved.
9.
No plans are required.
✓
10.
Final water and sewer plans are required for our review and approval
prior to construction approval.
11.
Final site plan may /may not be signed.
12.
RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections.
13.
City of Charlottesville approval for sewer.
✓
Comments:
• Final construction plans are required for review and approval by the ACSA.
• Check contours to be sure minimum grade can be achieved in the proposed relocated sewer.
168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698
www.serviceauthoriy.org
R r,
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701 -3819
Gregory A. Whirley
Commissioner of Highways
May 14`h, 2012
Mr. Glenn Brooks
Department of Engineering and Development
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Subject: Site Review Meeting Comments May 17'h, 2012 site review meeting
Dear Mr. Brooks:
Below are VDOT's comments on the Site Plans for the May 17'h, 2012 Site Review Committee
Meeting:
SDP - 2012 -00023 Whitewood Road (Day Care Center) - Preliminary (Chris Perez)
1. The proposed entrance on Route 1495 needs to meet the minimum geometrical
requirements in accordance with the VDOT Road Design Manual, appendix F. The
width of the entrance needs to be 24 feet between the curbs for a distance of 35 feet back
from the edge of the existing road.
2. Curb ramps need to be located so they line up with the crosswalk which is outside of the
adjacent travel lanes. Type A curb ramps should be used and placed so there is a
minimum 4 foot by 4 foot area outside of the Route 1495 travel lane.
3. The existing sight line easement will need some clearing and grading to obtain adequate
sight distance.
4. The ITE trip generation projections that were previously sent to VDOT through e -mail
should be on the title sheet.
5. There is a street tree shown in the existing pavement at the intersection of 1455 and 1495.
6. The proposed connection to the waterline under existing Rotue 1455 will need to be
bored and the receiving pit at the tie in will require a utility patch in accordance with the
VDOT standard.
SDP - 2012 -00024 Timberwood Commons/ RIO —BLA (Ellie Ray)
1. VDOT has requested certification of materials and construction in accordance with the
VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications and the Road and Bridge Standards to consider
acceptance of the unapproved parking area that is proposed to be a bus stop. This
information has not been provided at this time and VDOT cannot recommend approval of
a site plan or plat dedicating right of way around the bus stop without ensuring it was
properly constructed. If the construction cannot be certified then the applicant should
submit a plan that removes the proposed bus stop from the plan and reconstruct the
curbing to the previous approved construction plan.
2. In a meeting with the representative of the owner, VDOT agreed that placing the
sidewalk adjacent to the back of curb would not require the sidewalk to be constructed to
8 feet because there would not be street parking. VDOT did request that the right of way
be set back 4 feet from the back of sidewalk to accommodate any sign placement. This
request is not shown on this plan.
3. There is a proposed CG -12 Type B that does not appear to be necessary because there is
no crosswalk in this location.
SDP - 2012 -00025 Verizon Wireless / Vest Property Tier II PWSF (Joanne Tu Purtsezova)
1. No comments.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
VDOT Zion Crossroads
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Hof ALg
J$
S ®� �
IRGINt�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Frank Pohl
From: Christopher P. Perez- Senior Planner
Division: Zoning & Current Development
Date: May 14, 2012
Subject: SDP201200023 Whitewood Road (Day Care Center) - Preliminary Site Plan
The Planner for the Zoning & Current Development Division of the Albemarle County
Department Community Development will recommend approve the plan referred to above when
the following items have been satisfactorily addressed. (The following comments are those that
have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated
based on further review.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference to the
Albemarle County Code.]
1. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(d)] The plan indicates impacts to critical slopes that are not shown
on the previously approved final site plan from SDP200700120 - Global Country for World
Peace. Specifically those on the western most portion of the property nearest to Tax Map 61
Parcel 26, which on the Day Care plan is depict as a drive aisle and parking. If a waiver has
been obtained for this area on a valid final site plan, please provide documentation and
provide a note on the plan. Otherwise, a critical slope waiver needs to be requested for this
area and approval will have to be granted before this plan can be approved.
2. Remove the note on sheet 2 with regard to critical slopes, as SDP2000 -007 — Whitewood
office Park is no longer a valid final site plan. Or if applicable revise the note for critical
slopes to reference the last approved final site plan: SDP200700120 - Global Country World
Peace as well as the date of approval, as this is the only valid final site plan for the property,
which appears to depict disturbance of the critical slopes on the eastern most portion of the
property. Thus disturbance of these slopes without a waiver remains valid.
[Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(b)] On the plan provide information for the site's pick -up and
drop -off area, as this information is required for the site.
4. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(b)] Note #15 on page 1 lists "the maximum number of employees
per shift (2 shifts) as 25 ". To assure the site has adequate parking, please clarify the total
amount of staff working onsite at any one time. My question relates to the potential for the
two shifts to overlap at any point.
5. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(b)] Provide the square footage of recreation area on the site.
6. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(a)] Assure the sheets are listed as sheet 1 of 3, sheet 2 of 3 ... etc
[Chapter 18 Section 32.5.61 & 4.12.16(c)1)] The site depicts 20' wide drive aisles (the
minimum width for two way travel aisles), thus the standard parking width of 10' shall apply.
In order to qualify for 9' wide parking spaces as depicted on the plan, the drive aisles must be
a minimum of 24' wide. Revise to comply with the ordinance.
8. [Chapter 18 Section 4.12.15(g)] For all commercial development with eight (8) or more
parking spaces, curb is required to be established at the edge of all parking areas and access
aisles. Assure that the site meets this requirement and that the curb is clearly called out on the
plan.
9. [Chapter 18 Section 4.12.6(e)] As shown, bumper blocks are required for the parking spaces
fronting the proposed building. Provide these pursuant to section 4.12.6(e) OR revise the
proposed 5' wide sidewalk to be 6' in width as this would negate the need for bumper blocks
for these spaces.
10. [Chapter 18 Section 32.7.2.8] Due to the location of the proposed five (5) offsite shared
parking spaces it is recommended that the site provide for safe pedestrian access (in the form
of a sidewalk) between the two sites which would allow for pedestrian traffic without
utilizing the main drive aisles as a pedestrian access way.
11. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(n)] Provide the dimensions of: all retaining walls throughout the
site, dumpster pad area, fencing, and all segments of parking spaces (provide width of
handicapped spaces (8' wide is the minimum for handicapped spaces)). Also indicate handrail
for any retaining wall over 4' high.
12. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(n) & 4.12.19] On the plan provide the paving material for the
parking lot, drive aisles, and dumpster pad. Also, for the dumpster pad assure it extends a
minimum of 8' beyond the front of the dumpster. [18- 4.12.19]
13. [Chapter 18 Section 4.12.19 & 32.7.9] Provide the height of the fence for the dumpster
screening. Assure it meets the requirements of 32.7.9. Thus it must be a minimum height of
6' (six feet).
14. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(q)] Due to the nature of the facility and the intensity of the
development, on the plan please provide traffic generation data for the site based upon current
VDOT rates, to include the estimated vehicles per day and direction of travel for all
connections to the public road.
15. [Comment] At the entrance of Oak Forest Drive it appear that a portion of the retaining wall
is depicted as penetrating the 20' undisturbed buffer area. In order to continue as shown a
waiver to disturb this area would need to be applied for and approved. If this is not your
intent, please revise this section of the plan to omit/revise this section of the retaining wall so
that it does not impact the 20' undisturbed buffer area.
16. [Chapter 18 Section 32.5.6(p)] Please be advised that the following will be required for final
site plan approval:
- Outdoor lighting information including a photometric plan and location, description, and
photograph or diagram of each type of outdoor luminaire [Sec. 32.7.8.2 & Sec. 4.17]
- A landscape plan in accordance with [Sec. 32.7.9]. Also, when the landscape plan is
submitted assure that the tree within the VDOT right -of -way for Oak Forest Drive is
removed, as this is not permissible.
VDOT Comments — Joel DeNunzio
1. The proposed entrance on Route 1495 needs to meet the minimum geometrical requirements in
accordance with the VDOT Road Design Manual, appendix F. The width of the entrance needs to
be 24 feet between the curbs for a distance of 35 feet back from the edge of the existing road.
2. Curb ramps need to be located so they line up with the crosswalk which is outside of the
adjacent travel lanes. Type A curb ramps should be used and placed so there is a minimum 4 foot
by 4 foot area outside of the Route 1495 travel lane.
3. The existing sight line easement will need some clearing and grading to obtain adequate sight
distance.
4. The ITE trip generation projections that were previously sent to VDOT through e -mail should
be on the title sheet.
5. There is a street tree shown in the existing pavement at the intersection of 1455 and 1495.
6. The proposed connection to the waterline under existing Rotue 1455 will need to be bored and
the receiving pit at the tie in will require a utility patch in accordance with the VDOT standard.
Fire and Rescue Comments - Robbie Gilmer
1. VSFPC 507.5.1 Where required. Fire hydrant systems shall be located and installed as directed
by the fire department. Fire hydrant systems shall conform to the written standards of the
jurisdiction and the fire department. Hydrant spacing shall be 400 feet per travelway.
2. VSFPC 912.2 Location. With respect to hydrants, driveways, buildings and landscaping, fire
department connections shall be so located that fire apparatus and hose connected to supply the
system will not obstruct access to the buildings for other fire apparatus. The location of fire
department connections shall be approved by the fire chief.
VSFPC 912.2.1 Visible location. Fire department connections shall be located on the street side
of buildings, fully visible and recognizable from the street or nearest point of fire department
vehicle access or as otherwise approved by the fire chief.
FDC Shall be freestanding within 50 feet of a hydrant on the street side of the building. With a
sign marking the FDC red back ground with white letters.
E911— Andrew Slack
No objections
Building Inspections — Jay Schlothauer
No objections
Additional comments from the other reviewing agencies will be forwarded. Please contact
Christopher P. Perez at the Department of Community Development 296 -5832 ext. 3443 for
further information.
*-&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Christopher Perez, Project Planner
From: Phil Custer, Engineering Review
Date: 14 May 2012
Subject: Whitewood Road (Day Care Center) Preliminary Site Plan (SDP- 2012 - 00023)
The preliminary site plan for the Day Care Center on Whitewood Road has been reviewed. Engineering
review can recommend approval to the preliminary site plan after the following comments have been
addressed.
1. The undisturbed buffer is shown as being disturbed at the entrance onto Oak Forest Drive. On the
next submittal, please modify the plan to stop grading at the 20ft buffer line or provide a letter
requesting permission for the disturbance. [18- 21.7.c]
2. When travelways are 20ft in width, perpendicular parking spaces must be loft in width. [18-
4.12.16.c.1]
3. Please show the sight distance triangle for the entrance onto Oak Forest Drive. Will selective
clearing at the east end of the undisturbed buffer be necessary to establish a sight line? If so, a
waiver to disturb the buffer must be granted. [18- 4.12.17.b, 18- 32.5.6.s]
4. Please detail on the plan what must be done to provide adequate sight distance at the entrance onto
Whitewood Road. Any approval will be conditioned on obtaining safe sight lines for this
intersection. [18- 4- 12.17.b, 18- 32.5.6.s]
The following are final site plan comments that are provided for the applicant's information.
These do not need to be addressed prior to preliminary approval but include things engineering
staff will comment on in the final plan submittal.
5. Bumper blocks will be required on the parking spaces south of the building or a 6ft sidewalk,
exclusive of the 6" curb, will be required. [18- 4.12.16.e]
6. The dumpster pad will need to be expanded so that there is at least 8ft in front of the dumpster.
The grading in the area will be more closely examined to make sure the gutter does not direct
runoff across the pad. [18- 4.12.19]
7. Guardrail will likely be required above the retaining wall on the west side of the site for the
travelway on TMP 61 -26. [18- 32.7.2.8]
8. The two filterra units treating the parking lot have been proposed with unusual alignments that
appear to likely provide substandard treatment. Please look at providing more traditional
alignment along the curblines without the addition of concrete flumes. A DI -3B may be required
south of the Rising Redbud to minimize runoff into the public street anyway. [17- 315.A, 18-
4.12.15.b]
9. A manhole to provide access into underground detention systems is required at both ends.
10. It is recommended that the retaining wall north of the 12 western parking spaces is flared at least
two feet to allow passengers to exit the vehicle as easily as they would in a normal spot.
File: El_psp_sdp201200023 Whitewood Road Preliminary Site Plan.doc
*—&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Chris Perez, Planning Review
From: Phil Custer, Engineering Review
Date: 11 June 2012
Subject: Whitewood Road Day Care Center Critical Slope Waiver Request (SDP- 2012 - 00023)
The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed. The engineering analysis of the request follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The applicant intends to disturbed all critical slopes on site to construct the day care facility and its
associated parking. The slopes at the perimeter of the site are almost definitely from the construction of
Whitewood Road, Oak Forest Drive, and the Virginia Law Foundation site to the east. The remainder of
the critical slopes is more recent and appears to have been created as part of the implementation of a
previously approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.
Areas
Acres
Total site
1.53 acres approximately
Critical slopes
0.22
,of site
Critical slopes disturbed
0.22
1 100% of critical slopes
Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable
alternative locations:
This disturbance is not exempt.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2:
"movement of soil and rock"
Proper slope construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will minimize any
movement of soil.
"excessive stormwater runoff'
The applicant will be required to detain post - development runoff to pre - development rates as well as
prove adequacy of the downstream drainage system.
"siltation"
Inspection and bonding by the County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper
stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability.
"loss of aesthetic resource"
The slopes are not an aesthetic resource in my opinion.
"septic effluent"
This neighborhood and parcel are serviced by public sewer.
Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns that would cause me to recommend that
disturbance to these critical slopes be prohibited.
file: Mew w PBC Whitewood Road.doc