The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSUB201400063 Review Comments Preliminary Plat 2014-10-20 Christopher Perez From: John Anderson Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 6:10 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; amiller @terraengineering.net; Glenn Brooks; Bill Fritz; Amelia McCulley; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: Fontana 4C Attachments: SUB201400063-2014-10-01 Section 3 Pond bank profile concept-terra-engineering-100114 email.pdf Steve, 14-Oct,we spoke after the VSMP informational meeting at county offices. I am not Planning coordinator for this project; many play a role,but insofar as the Final Grading Plan(ZMA#04- 18, Condition#2,Feb-24,2008)requires County Engineer review and approval,please accept: 1. This note relates to Proffer Final Grading Plan,to what is required for approval. This note relies on: • Terra Engineering notes/attachments • Proffer condition#2 • Recent preliminary plats(4-Jun 14; 20-Aug 14, 1-Oct 14) • Engineering review comments(10-Aug 12,20-Jun 14, 9-Sep-14) 2. Amelia McCulley wrote"a full-blown WPO plan and application are not required with the preliminary plat for compliance with proffer#2."(email: Wed 4/2/2014 2:30 PM). 3. Tue 10/7/2014 9:38 PM,you wrote, asking"Since this [SWM design data] was submitted to the County in June 2012 and November 2012 to satisfy final grading plan review by County Engineering, can these SWM facilities be grandfathered?John-in our last meeting(September 25,2014),you indicated that this may be appropriate. Please let us know. We know that some revisions are required and we are addressing those." 4. In note sent 18-Oct,you wrote, "As of now,we a have a 50+page drainage computations and stormwater report for Sections 1 and 2 that will go in with next submission"—Answer to question of grandfathering depends on prior qualifying approval. When we spoke 14-Oct,you explained a level of design and review that should meet conditions listed at§17-501,C.1.—please read this section of code. Also,please share what computational information you have on SWM facilities for Fontana Phase 4C,not as WPO plan submittal, but to settle question of whether Fontana 4C is eligible for consideration under the old technical review criteria. I will not review this material as I would review a VSMP application— just need to confirm layouts. 5. If Phase 4C can be grandfathered,we must know. If extended detention design(ref, Phil Custer)was reviewed prior to 30-Jun 2012 as meeting quality and quantity standards under 9VAC25-870-96, it means you could revise contours consistent with stepped wall design you shared with me 1-Oct(.pdf),but also consistent with 3-ft limit. 10-Aug-12,Phil wrote: "After further discussion between the Zoning and Engineering Departments regarding the prohibition of retaining walls in Proffer 2.D,the determination has been made that retaining walls can be permitted in Open Space lots(in Fontana 4C,the extended detention facility lot)if they are limited to tiered 3 ft walls with a reasonable separation between them." 6. Proffer 2.D. states: "Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses(lawns)shall not exceed a gradient of three(3)feet horizontal distance for each one(1)foot of vertical rise or fall (3:1)." Slopes no steeper than 2:1 may be proposed for non-lawn areas,but proffer#2 prohibits slopes>3:1 for lawns. C4.0.0 (10/01/14)shows that portions of back lawns of Lots 23,24,25 rise(2:1)to meet a retaining wall that is 4-5' H. If the wall base were lowered 2-3' for a distance of 250',2:1 slopes could be eliminated. That is, it appears that a 5-7' wall may reduce slopes sufficiently to meet Proffer#2. With your help,with Planning guidance on how you may resubmit, if 2:1 slopes at Lots 23,24, 25 are made 3:1 or flatter,if 2:1 slopes are made 3:1 or flatter using stepped walls above the detention basin(Attached sketch), if SWM facility design provided a layout for sections 1 and 2 (bioretention filter)and section 3 (extended detention) prior to 1-Jul-12,then with layouts,with 3:1 or flatter slopes, and taken together with design elements present on 10-1-14 preliminary plat,design will meet proffer#2. 1 Four items, in my view, are needed omeet Final Grading Plan,Proffer Condition#2 [in addition to design features shown on 10-01-14 preliminary plat]: 1. Confirmation that extended detention and bioretention facility design layouts existed prior to 1-Jul-12. This would give assurance concerning grades above extended detention basin—that available space works. 2. Slopes meeting design standards found at §18-30.7.5 (Steep Slope Overlay District)for steep slopes above extended detention basin. 3. Lawn areas: 3:1, or flatter. 4. Revise preliminary plat to reflect 1-3, above- I have not completed review of preliminary plat, 10-1-14—these are not comments on the preliminary plat,but my view of what it takes to approve Final Grading,per Proffer#2. Please call if you have any questions- John E. Anderson.PE!Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3069 From: John Anderson Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 11:59 AM To: 'Steve Driver' Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; amiller @terraengineering.net; Glenn Brooks; Bill Fritz; Amelia McCulley; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: Fontana 4C I am reviewing documents linked to this(and previous) email, and will respond by the end of the day—thanks for your patience,Steve From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver@ terraengineering.net] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 7:23 PM To: John Anderson Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; amiller@terraengineering.net Subject: Fontana 4C John, I spoke with Tony. He's okay with the approach you and I discussed; Preliminary Plat approval and sectioned construction (Sections 1 and 2 final plans) to provide more time to work out whatever County Engineering feels is needed in Section 3 (Brunello)to obtain Preliminary Plat approval. We need a grading permit (VSMP) for Sections 1 and 2 at the earliest possible date. We would like to obtain that before County staff bails out for Christmas. We want to get County Engineering to a comfort zone in 3 so that 1 and 2 can go forward. As discussed, we plan to submit Sections 1 and 2 final plans with next submission. Can we combine Road and WPO plans in one set and submit E+SC separately, but both sets at once? Seems like a waste of time and paper to separate Road and WPO. 2 As of now, we a have a 50+ page drainage computations and stormwater report for Sections 1 and 2 that will go in with next submission. This includes comps for times of concentration, trail culvert pipe design, ditch flow adequacy comps, ditch lining comps, pipe conveyance comps, headwater comps, pipe velocity comps, urban curb inlet comps, pick-off inlet comps, grate capacity comps, SWM pond routings, water quality comps, pre/post development runoff comps, and sediment basin comps. There will be other final documents including, but not limited to, VDOT and ACSA, .e.g. pavement designs and water and sewer summaries. Also, at same time we'll resubmit a revised Preliminary Plat too if necessary to get to a grading "comfort zone" in Section 3 for purposes of Preliminary Plat approval. I know you are now reviewing the last Preliminary Plat submission. I hope we're close. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 3 I, r ' IIII••IMII 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 , 111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111115 01 .01111111111 llIMI11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111MSlai ummignumill iiiIINE11111111111111111111111111111111111.111rall 11111,1111.111 8 Irommorinli is _1110. iri IMPIENINIII 11 vein. II INN . -NEE al opyirom . 101111111111111 II MEI ENO URI ERN RIM -11111MMIRBI1111111111M _ IIIIIE NMI ill Mill 111111111k111 III - --- -1-.NII IVIIIIIMI - r 1 i .. NM 11111111 - •i11l11l1ow1111a1.s1.1MNO111M11 I M11I.1N 11 1111I111iM1.111li1E1e1aHMlNlNoinuiMINCV T/WIMIrI I OMIIMm T 1 ONM '° Mika 1MMMNIHE1AMI E M 11111 1 . iiNSHOligiiin•iiiii .7, IMIIIIIIIIIIIFIFAMEENINIIIIIIIIIII ••M1111111p EMI _Ill 111111 1111111111111,1111111111111 11111111111101111111 __NM i _0, nlin FA 11111111•911111 , LAIN I 4__ _ ' Eno simmail ;.---i MINI 1111110mil_ inigi Iminnorm...,F1111111E111111 ramp Nommi :in_ s .rm. II 1111E11111111111111111 NM Ilhumull _ WEIN ,t__fmiltIIIIJIII il III MEI III oral 1 ,.. mom ..rrE mom limim Iii • -A ' museum Nip, ': 111111.1111 -itr... .._ 1 ._ . ., 11111- III • Ma 1w MIME Ell i - 7.11111111 II L, Ci IMMO! IMIMIIIMIMIII 1111 -.1 MEIN 1 Et .4-, -41 womml la 1 ansimmis EN si. .zb En mminks ... . _ ENIMIIII 111111111r11 PI --- • • III - ' • illargl t II Lyi _ - _ .. 11 11111111Ek ;' 4.1111111111.1mm. r ......... „, ...rd. .4„„..., _A' tdr 111111111111111 II 11111 t "MU 4 t... iith „_ ,Iiirli, I .... - - INF '-- 1---‘ - F! A millE - - .. _ MAI - NE Emmonsm,AssimmirmuE onitmou In muumporomansillinki MINN .111111111$1 _ ill 1111111111 Mn °111111111111111111111111 Elliff_111111111111111IN 1 , _ 111111=11 r 1 1 0_1 ._u_imounnaimmi r , 11 — II II , , .._.... ...._.__......-.4.--..L