Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201200056 Review Comments Minor Amendment 2012-12-28i" ,. `IRGINZP COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 Project: Plan preparer: Owner or rep.: Plan received date: Revision submitted Date of comments: Reviewer: YVES DELORME INC - MIA Shimp Engineering, PC YVES DELORME INC 18 September 2012 10 December 2012 28 December 2012 Max Greene ' 1I► IIIII 11 [Justin @ shimpengineering.com] [No Contact Information Provided] The Site Development Plans (SDP201200056) submitted 10 December 2012 have received Engineering Review and do not appear to meet Albemarle County minimum checklist items for approval. Please adequately address the following comments for final approval: A) Road and drainage plans (SDP200400042) 1) VDOT approval is required. Comments will be forwarded when received. [DM905] Comments have not been received at this time. 2) Centerline turning radius does not appear large enough to meet the minimum single -unit truck design (30' Truck), as defined by AASHTO. Centerline is from the center of the travel -way (each lane) and should be a minimum 38' radius. The plan appears to show a 30' "Path of Front Overhang ". Please show radius within AASHTO design minimums. This item does not appear adequately addressed. Please show Vehicle tire path. Entrance Radius: The entrance radius should be designed to accommodate the design vehicle expected to use the entrance on a daily basis. Design Vehicle and Turning Radius by Land Use Land Use(s) Served by Access Design Vehicle Radius Residential Passenger Car/Pickup 24 Residential on Bus Route Single Unit Truck (Bus) 45 Office with Separate Truck Access Passenger Car/Pickup 24 Office without Truck Access Single Unit Truck 42 Commercial / Retail with Separate Truck Access Passenger Car/Pickup 24 Commercial / Retail without Separate Truck Access WB -50 Truck 45 Industrial with Separate Truck Access Passenger Car/Pickup 24 Industrial without Separate Truck Access WB -50 Truck 45 Recreational without Watercraft Access or Camping Passenger Car/Pickup 24 Recreational with Watercraft Access or Camping Motor Home/Boat 50 Agricultural Field Access Single Unit Truck 42 Municipal and County Roads WB -50 Truck 45 TABLE 4 -1 DESIGN VEHICLE AND TURNING RADIUS BY LAND USE Note: "with Separate Truck Access" indicates truck prohibition from primary access. Entrances into mixed use developments will be designed to accommodate the largest design vehicle expected to use that entrance. Radii * - All commercial entrances should have radii large enough to accommodate the Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 3 largest design vehicle that will use it without creating undue congestion or hazard on the through street. The minimum entrance radius allowed should be 25 feet and the minimum exit radius allowed should be 25 feet. 3) Entrance (Right Lane) does not appear to be a smooth transition from the existing pavement. Please show a road profile and spot elevations on the plan for verification. [ 18- 32.6.6.e] Proposed Entrance still has a 33% slope for over 5 feet. Additional grading is required to meet the minimum slope requirements. 4) Please show a pavement construction detail for review. This item has been minimally addressed. Usually a detail showing the entire right -of -way, curb, pavement and percent of crown is shown for typical pavement details for construction. 5) Location of storm -drain inlet should be at the lowest point possible. This should be clarified with a road profile and spot elevations. This item has been addressed at this time. 6) Please show spot elevations for top and bottom of wall at grade breaks. This item has been adequately addressed. 7) VDOT guardrail or wall extended to top of guardrail height will be required. [18- 32.7.2] VDOT end sections are missing from plan. Please show terminal treatment end sections on the plan. 8) Existing entrance may require reconstruction to meet VDOT design requirements, but not enough existing topography was included for determination. [18- 32.5.6.d, 18- 32.7.2.1, 18.32.7.3] Additional information is needed for determination. 33% grade at entrance will need to be corrected. 9) Proposed topography in the travel -way appears steeper than the 10% as stated on the plan. Please space the proposed travel -way contours to the minimum 10% slope or flatter. This item appears adequately addressed at this time. B) Stormwater Management and Mitigation Plan (WP0200500007) 1) Stormwater Application and fee are required prior to project review. http: / /www.albemarle.org/upload /images /forms center /departments /Community Development/for ms/Engineering _and_WPO_Forms/Plan_ Review _- _Application_Stormwater_Mana eg ment- BMP Plan.pdf Comment adequately addressed. 2) Underground storage /detention needs access manholes for inspection and maintenance. Comment appears adequately addressed. 3) Details may be required for adequate construction and inspection of stormwater system. Comment appears adequately addressed. C) Erosion Control Plan (WP0200500007) 1) Erosion and Sediment Control application and fee are required prior to project review. httD: / /www.albemarle.ora/unload /images /forms center /departments /Community Develonment/for ms/Engineering andWPOForms/Plan Review- ApTlicationStormwaterMana eg ment- BMP Plan.pdf Comment adequately addressed. 2) Silt fence appears to run down slope like a diversion. Silt fence proposed as a diversion requires a sediment control structure designed for the total drainage area to outlet of diversion. This office recommends showing wire supported -silt fence on a single grade above the roadside drainage swale to allow for construction of the retaining wall. The wire support will help stop anything that may roll down the slope during construction before it rolls into the road or blocks the drainage swale. Comment appears adequately addressed. 3) Inlet and outlet protection is required on the stormwater pipes. Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 Once these comments have been addressed, please submit 3 copies of the revised plans, calculations, and narratives to Current Development Engineering along with the required review fee and transmittal form. Current Development Engineering is available from 2:30 -4 PM on Thursdays to discuss these review comments. Please contact Max Greene at 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3283 or email m .-reene @albemarle.ora to schedule an appointment. [17- 204.f] An application for an erosion and sediment control plan that requires modifications, terms, or conditions to be included in order for it to be approved shall be deemed to be withdrawn if the owner fails to submit a revised plan addressing the omitted modifications, terms or conditions within six (6) months after the owner is informed of the omitted information as provided under paragraph (B). File: CDDEl_sdp_MRG_Yves Delmore Inc. - mia.doc