HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201500043 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2016-03-11Short Review Comments Report for:
SDP201500043
SubApplication Type:
Fifth Street Place - Final
Final Site Development Plan
Date Completed:09/28/2015
Reviewer:Justin Deel CDD Engineering
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:09/02/2015
Reviewer:Megan Yaniglos CDD Planning
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:08/13/2015
Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer CDD Inspections
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated July 31, 2015.
Provide at least one van-accessible parking space, each, including access aisles and curb cuts, for
Buildings 2 and 3.
Division:
Date Completed:08/14/2015
Reviewer:Andrew Slack CDD E911
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:The applicant will need to contact this office with a list of proposed road names to be approved
before final approval can be given.
Division:
Date Completed:08/31/2015
Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:See 7/22/15 ARB action letter.
Division:
Date Completed:09/14/2015
Reviewer:Shelly Plaster VDOT
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:09/13/2015
Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Admin
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 8/3/15.
1. Please work with ACSA on hydrant locations. Fire Rescue has already worked with ACSA to
remove 3 hydrants and relocate a couple hydrants.
2. Please clarify if building #5 will have two FDC locations.
3. Travel lane in front of buildings #1,#2, #3 and #4 shall be 26' FC/FC and shall not be further then
30' from the building. This will allow for aerial truck access to the buildings.
4. Fire Flow test required before final approval.
Division:
Page:1 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 19, 2017
Date Completed:12/11/2015
Reviewer:Andrew Slack CDD E911
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Before final approval is given the developer should contact this office with a list of three (3) potential
road names to be approved.
Division:
Date Completed:12/28/2015
Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:This project is scheduled for ARB review on January 19, 2016. Comments will be provided after that
meeting.
Division:
Date Completed:01/05/2016
Reviewer:Justin Deel CDD Engineering
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:12/28/2015
Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer CDD Inspections
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:Based on plans stamped December 8, 2015.
No further comments or conditions.
Division:
Date Completed:01/04/2016
Reviewer:Megan Yaniglos CDD Planning
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:1. The landscape sheets need to be a part of the site plan and not separate.
2. Assurance needs to be made that the landscaping proposed on the retaining walls can be planted.
Most retaining walls contain geogrid and greatly reduce the likelihood of landscaping being able to be
placed.
Division:
Date Completed:12/19/2015
Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Admin
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 12/8/15.
1. Travel lane in front of buildings #1,#2, #3 and #4 shall be 26' FC/FC and shall not be further then
30' from the building. This will allow for aerial truck access to the buildings.
2. Fire Flow test required before final approval.
Division:
Date Completed:01/04/2016
Reviewer:Shelly Plaster VDOT
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:03/11/2016
Reviewer:unassigned engineer VDOT
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:03/03/2016
Reviewer:Megan Yaniglos CDD Planning
Review Status:Requested Changes
Division:
Page:2 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 19, 2017
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:1. Provide the County signature panel on the cover sheet.
2. Provide a general detail for the retaining walls and a notation that assures that landscaping will be
incoporated with the wall design.
Date Completed:02/22/2016
Reviewer:Andrew Slack CDD E911
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Before final approval is given the developer should contact this office with a list of three (3) potential
road names to be approved.
Division:
Date Completed:03/11/2016
Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:03/04/2016
Reviewer:Matthew Wentland CDD Engineering
Review Status:See Recommendations
Reviews Comments:Plans dated 2/12/16 and sheet C-02A dated 3/3/16 -
All previous comments appear to have been addressed. Engineering has no objections once the
revised C-02A sheet is included and the VSMP application has been approved.
Division:
Date Completed:03/04/2016
Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:I have reviewed the plan with revision date of 2/12/2016 and I have the following comments:
1. Comment #1 in the January 29, 2016 ARB action letter read: “Revise the plant schedule to identify
the planting height of screening shrubs, not the container size. Planting height of shrubs intended to
screen equipment visible from the EC should be 4’ minimum.” The VBC, FG, ICH, and IGS plants
are used for screening but container sizes have not been changed to minimum 4’ high at planting.
Please revise accordingly.
2. Comment #7 in the January 29, 2016 ARB action letter read: “Identify on the plan the manufacturer
and color proposed for the retaining walls.” I don’t see the block color identified on the plan. Can you
help me locate it? If it isn’t yet on the plan, please revise the plan accordingly.
Please provide:
1. One set of revised drawings addressing each of these conditions.
2. A memo including detailed responses indicating how each condition has been satisfied. If changes
other than those requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also. Highlighting
the changes in the drawing with “clouding” or by other means will facilitate review and approval.
3. A “Revised Application Submittal” form. This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure
proper tracking and distribution.
When staff's review of this information indicates that all conditions of approval have been met, a
Certificate of Appropriateness may be issued.
Division:
Date Completed:03/02/2016
Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 2/12/16.
No comments or objections.
Division:
Date Completed:03/07/2016
Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB
Review Status:Approved
Division:
Page:3 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 19, 2017
Review Status:Approved
Reviews Comments:
Date Completed:03/29/2016
Reviewer:Megan Yaniglos CDD Planning
Review Status:Administrative Approval
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Page:4 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 19, 2017
Megan Yaniglos
From: Seale, Dennis L. (VDOT)<Dennis.Seale@VDOT.Virginia.gov>
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 11:00 AM
To: Joe Murray
Cc: Nathan Rasnick; Megan Yaniglos; Malachi Mills
Subject: Re: 5th St Place- plan approvals update
Attachments: image005Jpg; image006.jpg; image007Jpg; image008.png
Joe,
VDOT has no additional comments on these plans. Please let me know if you have any other questions or
concerns.
Thanks,
Dennis Seale
Engineering Specialist
VDOT
Charlottesville Residency
434-531-2877
Sent from my Whone
On Mar 11, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Joe Murray <jmurray@DRP-LLC.com> wrote:
Nathan,
Do we have the VDOT comments yet?
Thanks
Joe
Joseph C. Murray Sr.
Construction Manager
Dominion Realty Partners LLC
555 Fayetteville St
Suite 210
Raleigh NC 27601
919-369-6766 (c)
From: Nathan Rasnick <nrasnick@rkk.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:37
Subject: RE: 5th St Place- plan approvals update
To: Joe Murray <jmurradrp-llc.com>
Cc: Megan Yaniglos <myaniglos@albemarle.org>, DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT)
Megan Yaniglos
From: Alex Morrison<amorrison@serviceauthority.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 7:48 AM
To: 'Nathan Rasnick'
Cc: 'Malachi Mills'; 'Joe Murray'; Megan Yaniglos
Subject: RE: 5th St Place- ACSA plan review/approval
Nathan,
I have no comments on the final revisions. Please submit 3 copies of the plan, along with a final water and sewer
data sheet. Once I get the plans I will prepare the approval package and circulate it for signatures. I won't be able to
sign off on the final site plan until I obtain all signatures internally (this could take up to a week). I would be
comfortable with the final site plan gathering signatures while I obtain final approval here.
Alexander J. Morrison, P. E.
Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
(0) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116
(C) 434-981-5577
(F) 434-979-0698
-----Original Message -----
From: Nathan Rasnick [mailto:nrasnick@rkk.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 6:01 PM
To: Alex Morrison
Cc: Malachi Mills; 'Joe Murray'; 'Megan Yaniglos'
Subject: RE: 5th St Place- ACSA plan review/approval
Alex,
Good evening. Just wanted to check in on 5th Street. Are you good with the revisions I sent yesterday? We're trying
to submit signature sets to the county by the end of the week.
Thanks,
S. Nathan Rasnick II, P.E.
Project Engineer
RK&K
2100 E. Cary Street, Suite 309
Richmond, VA 23223
804.771.9119 D 1804.782.1903 P 1804.782.2142 F www.rkk.com
RESPONSIVE PEOPLE I CREATIVE SOLUTIONS
-----Original Message -----
From: Nathan Rasnick
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 10:50 AM
Application for Code Modification
Date
To Article/Chapter: 4 -r1 El
V3 Acvcalz�
Section: ve :� I05 . �l^d�' :In t"�` f. Bv, + I IV
r�
Of the:
Name of Applicant:le-
Jvl1 t
Address of Applicant: �0_#1'` �- p �� 7 4
-�—�
Email Address & Phor
Location of Modification Request:i✓' r'' - !l. �,, an `7�- b
r !
Explain Reason for Modification Request:
ti�{{ 1
SIdt , 1, y(j 11 U I r f,
�•�'C�- 1 h I
�
This Modification is apto F' b : ' ' ?L to {, t=
Applicants '5ignrc ble C-0ature: , >-k:� ONLY. , Date: Z 7
' RECEIVE.r FEB 0 5 =
-!
6
�1.�E''•�� �1..s
JJ I �
s. a ►
—
. o
b
fes__,
G
Fireis
IC
n
y•
T r
ti�{{ 1
SIdt , 1, y(j 11 U I r f,
�•�'C�- 1 h I
�
This Modification is apto F' b : ' ' ?L to {, t=
Applicants '5ignrc ble C-0ature: , >-k:� ONLY. , Date: Z 7
' RECEIVE.r FEB 0 5 =
For Office Use Only
Modification Granted: Yes,K No❑
Detailed Reason for Action on Application:
cJ 5,1 e.All JA -4J- l A, -.7k enjitamsez was A61,e -,1a
M d cd e
JF
Fire Official Signature: Date:
ALBEMARLE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE /OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL
ADDITIONAL/MISCELLANEOUS FIRE PREVENTION FEE SCHEDULE
PURPOSE
Facility Inspection fees
i (in any fixed facility requiring
a permit in Table 107.2 of the
Fire Prevention Code
Required Fire Inspection for
Social Service License
(Ex: Day care/Adult Care etc)
Fie -inspection Fee
€ Albemarle Fire Rescue Plan
Review Fee
DESCRIPTION—
- FEE
Inspection Fee First two hours no charge
$100/hr thereafter
1 8 persons $25
9 20 persons I $50
21 - 50 persons $100
51 - 100 persons $200
101 -150 persons $300
151 -- 200 persons
201 or more persons
After initial inspection, it all violations
are corrected, no charge. If not, then
each re -inspection incurs a fee until an
agreement on remediation is reached
or all violations are corrected.
Site Plans
Special Use Permit
All Other
$400
$500 phis $50 for every 100 persons over 201
$0 (violations corrected)
$100 (per inspection)
$100 (per set of plans)
$50 (per application)
$75 (per event)
--"' Similar to the Zoning Variance and
Variancefli lodifieation and � Appeals Process to offset Cost of the $350 (application fee)
Albemarle County Fire Code J Fire Board of Appeals Operations
Board of Appeals Re ues
YlAGIl`11A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Yaniglos, Planning
From: Justin Deel, Engineering
Date: 28 September 2015
(Rev. 1) 5 January 2016
Subject: Fifth Street Place Final Site Plan (SDP- 2015- 00043)
The final site plan for Fifth Street Place has been reviewed by Engineering. The following
concerns should be addressed prior to approval;
1. The slope of the entrance should not exceed 4% for a distance of at least 40 feet [ 18-
4.12.17]. Please adjust.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
2. Parking lot grades cannot exceed 5 %. There are locations, particularly around the
entrance way, that do. Please adjust.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
3. The 5 parking spaces directly across from the entrance drive isle should be removed or
reconfigured. These spaces require backing or pulling directly out in to what is
essentially an intersection.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
4. The maximum steepness for constructed slopes is 2:1 [Albemarle County Design
Standards Manual, Section 8]. Please adjust slopes east of entrance and along SR 631, as
they exceed 2:1.
(Rev. 1) Comment not addressed. The proposed < 2:1 slopes along either side of the
entrance may be approved with an alternative ground cover that will ensure stabilization
which should be provided on plans. However, much of the proposed < 2:1 slopes along
SR 631 appear to be within the steep (managed) slopes overlay district. Section 18- 30.7.5
of the Albemarle County Code requires that all constructed slopes within the steep slopes
overlay district be no steeper than 2:1. Please adjust. Also, please show all steep slopes
overlays on proposed plans in order to verify the required design standards of 18- 30.7.5.
Note that single retaining walls within these districts may be no greater than 6 feet in
height.
5. All slopes 3:1 or greater should have low maintenance ground cover, such as lily turf or
similar. Please specify this on plans.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
6. Provide date and source of topographic information. This is especially important given
the recent transient nature of the topography of this parcel.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
7. Provide sealed retaining wall plans.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed. Retaining wall plans may be provided at the time of
Albemarle County Community Development
Engineering Review comments
Page 2 of 2
building permit application.
8. Remove the typical MSE wall detail on sheet C -02. Wall details should be included in
the above mentioned retaining wall plans.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
9. Provide drainage easement(s) for any drainage passing through the site from off -site.
There appears to be drainage along SR 631 that would be outside the VDOT ROW.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
10. Provide drainage computations and details. See attached drainage plan checklist, of
which all items should be addressed.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
11. A VSMP application must be approved before the final site plan can be approved. There
is currently no such application for the proposed project.
(Rev. 1) Comment partially addressed. A VSMP application (WPO201500094) has
been received and is currently under review.
Revision 1 Comments:
12. Two different top of wall elevations (TW) are shown at numerous places throughout the
plans. Please clarify this. Also, please include bottom of wall elevations; be sure to call
out the location of maximum height.
13. Please clarify the type(s) of walls being proposed. The plans currently say "dry stacked
retaining wall ", however the previous submission did include an MSE wall detail.
Depending on the wall type, the proposed landscaping at the tops of the walls may need
to be altered or removed.
14. Please remove Bioretention details sheet, as this information is reviewed and approved
with the VSMP application. Additionally, we have asked that typical details not be
provided, in favor of actual to -scale details showing both existing and proposed grades.
15. There appears to be a structure and pipe run missing from your plan as pipes 18A and
20A outfall underground. Please clarify. (VSMP SWM Comment #5).
file: SDP201500043 Engineering Review Rl.doe
t
RK fic MEMORANDUM
2100 East Cary Street
Suite 309
Richmond, VA 23223
Phone 804.782.1903
Fax 804.782.2142
www.rkk.com
Date: December 4, 2015
To: Justin Deel, Engineering
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville,VA 22902
From: Nathan Rasnick, PE (RK&K)
Cc: Malachi Mills, PE (RKK)
RE: Fifth Street Place Final Site Plan (SDP-2015-00043)
Comments(dated September 28,2015)
1. The slope of the entrance should not exceed 4% for a distance of at least 40 feet [18-
4.12.17]. Please adjust.
• Response:Revised. Please see sheet C-09A.
2. Parking lot grades cannot exceed 5%.There are locations, particularly around the entrance way,
that do. Please adjust.
• Response: Parking lot grades have been adjusted. Please see sheets C-09A thought C-09F.
3. The 5 parking spaces directly across from the entrance drive isle should be removed or
reconfigured.These spaces require backing or pulling directly out in to what is essentially an
intersection.
• Response:Relocated. Please see sheet C-07A.
4. The maximum steepness for constructed slopes is 2:1 [Albemarle County Design Standards
Manual,Section 8]. Please adjust slopes east of entrance and along SR 631, as they exceed 2:1.
• Response: In this area we are trying to provide a bench for the sewer and water line. We
need to coordinate this item with ACSE for final solution.
5. All slopes 3:1 or greater should have low maintenance ground cover, such as lily turf or similar.
Please specify this on plans.
• Response:Acknowledged. Coordination is ongoing with the engineering department to
determine an acceptable low maintenance ground cover.
6. Provide date and source of topographic information.This is especially important given the
recent transient nature of the topography of this parcel.
• Response:See Sheet C-038.
7. Provide sealed retaining wall plans.
• Response:Sealed retaining wall plans are not available at this time. Retaining walls for the
project are to be design build.
8. Remove the typical MSE wall detail on sheet C-02.Wall details should be included in the above
mentioned retaining wall plans.
• Response: General details removed. Construction general to provide engineered design for
review prior to permits.
9. Provide drainage easement(s)for any drainage passing through the site from off-site.There
appears to be drainage along SR 631 that would be outside the VDOT ROW.
• Response: 20'Drainage easement added.
10. Provide drainage computations and details.See attached drainage plan checklist, of which all
items should be addressed.
• Response: These items have now been submitted with the WPO/VSMP application.
11. A VSMP application must be approved before the final site plan can be approved.There is
currently no such application for the proposed project.
• Response:Application has now been submitted.
RK ftr
MEMORANDUM
2100 East Cary Street
Suite 309
Richmond, VA 23223
Phone 804.782.1903
Fax 804.782.2142
www.rkk.com
Date: December 4, 2015
To: Jay Schlothauer
Inspections
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville,VA 22902
From: Nathan Rasnick, PE (RK&K)
Cc: Malachi Mills, PE (RKK)
RE: Fifth Street Place Final Site Plan
Comments (dated August 13, 2015)
1. Provide at least one van-accessible parking space each including access aisles and curb cuts for
buildings 2 and 3.
• Response: One van-accessible space has now been provided at each building. Please
see sheets C-07A though C-07F.
. „...„ „or
.
MEMORANDUMmr
2100 East Cary Street
Suite 309
Richmond, VA 23223
Phone 804.782.1903
Fax 804.782.2142
www.rkk.com
Date: December 4, 2015
To: Shelly A. Plaster
Department of Transportation
Land Development Engineer—Culpeper District
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper,VA 22701
From: Nathan Rasnick, PE (RK&K)
Cc: Malachi Mills, PE (RKK)
RE: SDP-2015-00043 Fifth St. Place- Final Site Plan
Comments(dated September 14,2015)
Sheet C-07A Comments:
1. To help guide turning movements we recommend extending the raised median towards 5111
Street Extended (should be 2'from the edge of travel way).The engineer will need to
demonstrate that the raised island does not conflict with the left turn movements.
• Response: The raised median has been extending as recommended. Please see sheet C-
07A.
2. Within the entrance radii, the east and west side, a 4' buffer strip should also be provided
between the back of curb and the sidewalk.
• Response:A buffer has now been provided. Please see sheet C-07A.
3. On the west side of the entrance the sidewalk should extend to the end of the curb and gutter.
• Response:Revised. Please see sheet C-08B.
4. We recommend scheduling a meeting to discuss the proposed guardrail (see attachment).
a. The existing double face guardrail, on the west side of the entrance, should be extended
to the tangent portion of the entrance radii and a parallel terminal (Crash-cushion
attenuating terminal (CAT-350)) installed.
• Response: We have made revisions on this plan. Let's meet on this review to
finalize design.
b. On the east side of the entrance, at the tangent portion at approximately station 14+00,
a GR-11 should be installed.The new guardrail should be double sided and constructed
so that the face of the rail is flush with the face of curb.At the terminal end, at
approximate station 17+75, a GR-9 should be installed.Since there are currently no
terminals approved for use in conjunction with curbs the curb should drop to a 2" height
for approximately 50' in advance of the end of the terminal so that the vehicle is at the
appropriate height when contact is made. For a parallel terminal the 2"height should be
carried an additional 12' beyond the upstream end of the terminal, and the end of the
terminal should be offset 1'to keep the impact head behind the face of curb. A detail of
the curb transition should be provided .See our VDOT Guardrail Installation Training
(GRIT) Manual for additional information.
• Response: Entry modified.
c. It is understood the proposed road is private, however, we recommend installing CG-7,
along the throat of the proposed entrance,so that the guardrail can be constructed
flush with the face of curb. It can then extend towards the entrance onto 5111 Street
extended,turn behind the proposed sidewalk and terminate (GR-11) somewhere behind
the proposed side walk along 5th Street. If that portion of guardrail extends into the
right-of-way it will not be maintained by VDOT. If sidewalk is to be added in the future
the grading should be adjusted so that the guardrail is placed a minimum of 8'from the
face of curb.
• Response: Entry modified.
5. At approximate station 14+00,the proposed/existing sign labels are missing.
• Response:Existing sign labels have been added. Please see sheet C-07A.
Sheet C-07F Comments:
6. A note, for the Entrance/Turn Lane pavement section,should be added stating "Field verified
CBR test results are to be provided to VDOT and approval of the final design shall be obtained
prior to the construction of the pavement".
*low 'Nape
• Response:Noted. Please see sheet C-07F.
Sheet C-08C Comments:
7. Details of the bore pipe installation should be provided.
• Response:Additional detail has been added. Please see sheets C-04 and C-10D.
8. The casing should be 2X the diameter of the waterline.
• Response: Revised. Please see sheet C-08C and C-10D.
9. It is believed that rock is within the proposed jack and bore area. We recommend a geotechnical
investigation be performed
• Response:Acknowledged.
10. How will the pits be accessed? (i.e.: trench boxes or stepping back the grade).
• Response: To be determined by the contractor. It has been assumed that trench boxes
will be used and pit areas are now shown. Please see sheet C-10D.
11. If the pits (within/near the ROW) are being graded/stepped back then they should be graphically
graded out to adequately show their sizing,there effect on the existing roads and if
grading/construction easements are necessary.
• Response: Please see response above.All work is occurring within the existing right-of-
way or within easements being dedicated by the project property owner. Easement are
now shown on sheet C-08A through C-08F.
12. What measures will be taken to ensure public safety, assuming that the pits cannot be dug, the
casing bored, and backfilled on the same day. Will the boring pit/receiving pit remain open after
work hours?
• Response:Pits are now located behind either proposed or existing guardrail. Notes have
been added to sheet C-12 to ensure public safety.
13. The class of the encasement pipe should be provided.
• Response:ACSA encasement spec has been provided. Please see sheet C-04.
14. Boring and receiving pits should have sump pits to contain auger fluids if vacuum devices are not
operated throughout the boring operation.Therefore,the removal and final disposition of
excess fluids or spoils is the responsibility of the boring contractor. The work area should be
restored to pre-construction conditions or as identified on the final plans.
• Response: Will Comply.
15. The maintenance of traffic plan should incorporate the jack and bore operation.
• Response:Jack and bore operations are now indicated on the MOT plan. Please see
sheet C-12.
Sheet C-09A-09B Comments:
16. It would be helpful if the road stationing was included on the grading sheets while comparing
the 5111 Street cross-sections.
• Response: Road stationing is now included. Please see sheets C-09A thought C-09F.
Sheet C-10B Comments:
17. The limits of the right-of-way should be shown on the waterline profile (jack and bore section).
• Response: Right-of-way limits are now shown. Please see sheet C-10D.
18. Storm sewer, inlet and HGL computations should be provided.A detail showing the method of
connecting to existing storm sewer structures should be provided.
• Response: Calculations are now provided. Please see sheet C-16.
19. A typical road section should be provided and include the following: the pavement structure
including thickness and material of each layer graphically shown, the width of each travel
lane/tum lane from the edge of pavement to the edge of pavement, curb and gutter type,
sidewalk width and cross-slope, buffer width and cross-slope between the back of curb and
sidewalk, location and width of right-of-way lines, clear zone, roadway name, design speed and
design standard used.
• Response: Roadway sections have been added. Please see sheet C-12A.
Sheet C-12 Comments:
20. The intersection sight line triangle should also include the offset from edge of travel way and
centerline offset.
Now
• Response:A depiction of the offsets is now provided. Please see sheet C-12A.
21. The maintenance of traffic plan layout should be extended to include the limits of the advance
warning signs. Sign spacing's should be to scale on the plan and dimensioned accordingly.
• Response: MOT plan layout has been extended. Please see sheet C-12.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
January 4, 2016
Ms. Megan Yaniglos
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP - 2015 -00043 Fifth St. Place -- Final Site Plan
Dear Ms. Yaniglos,
We have reviewed the Final Site Plan for Fifth St. Place, as submitted by RK &K, with a signature date of
December 8, 2015 and have the following comments:
1. Sheet C -07A:
a. Previous comment: "To help guide turning movements we recommend extending the
raised median towards 5 "' Street Extended (should be 2' from the edge of travel way).
The engineer will need to demonstrate that the raised island does not conflict with the left
Bern movements, " — The raised median appears to have been shortened rather than
extended towards 51" Street. The median should be approx. 2' away from the
through lane on 5A street unless there are potential turning movement conflicts.
2. Previous comment: "We recommend scheduling a meeting to discuss the proposed guardrail
(see attachment): "
i. All end treatments should be labeled. For example, GR -11Is at approx.
stations 12 +30 and 13 +70 on 51" Street etc.
ii. Previous comment: At the terminal end, at approximate station 17 +75, a GR -9
should be installed, Since there are currently no terminals approved for use in
conjunction with curbs the curb should drop to a 2 " height for approximately 50'
in advance of the end of the terminal so that the vehicle is at the appropriate
height when contact is made. For a parallel terminal the 2 " height should be
carried an additional 12 ' beyond the upstream end of the terminal, and the end
of the terminal should be offset I 'to keep the impact head behind the face of
curb. A detail of the curb transition should be provided. The guardrail has been
Iengthened in this area over an existing section of curb and gutter(C &G). If
the guardrail is extended the existing C &G should also be modified as
mentioned above. See Sheet C -09B.
iii. A new section of guardrail is now proposed at approx. station 23 +18 on 5'"
Street. The new /modified installation shall be in accordance with the VDOT
Guardrail Installation Training (GRIT) Manual. Adding this portion of
guardrail may require additional sections of guardrail to be replaced
upstream.
3. Sheet C -080
a. Previous comment, "If the pits (ivilhin /near the ROW) are being graded /stepped back-
then they should be graphically graded ow to adequately show their sizing, there effect
on the existing roads and ifgrading /construction easements are necessary_ " It is
understood that the means /methods of the contractor are unknown at this time.
However, the receiving pit is approx. 7' deep and approx. 5' from the edge of
pavement. We are concerned that once excavation begins a portion of the road may
be undermined and/or the legs of the existing guardrail may be exposed. General
construction notes for the pits should address the necessary precautions /actions to
be taken to ensure the integrity of the road and guardrail system.
b. What type of fencing will be used? At a minimum we recommend installing
"International" Orange Plastic (Polyethylene) Safety fence as found in table 3.01 -A
of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook.
c. Previous comment: "The class of the encasement pipe should be provided. " - Steel
encasement pipe shall conform to the requirements of ASTM A139 with a minimum
wall thickness of 0.5 inch or ASTM A53 Standard weight Class. The plan sheets
should be updated accordingly.
d. Previous comment. The maintenance of traffic plan should incorporate the jack. and bore
operation. The MOT plan should also incorporate a shoulder closure for the
receiving pit.
4. Sheet C -12A: Typical Road Section
a. The new guardrail should be double sided and constructed so that the face of the rail is
flush with the face of curb. The section should be updated accordingly. Note: The only
section of guardrail that will not be installed along the face is at approx. station 17 +15
where the end terminal is offset V behind the face of curb, refer to comment 2.ii.
b. The section, to the west of the proposed entrance, guardrail location does vary however it
is located between the paved shoulder and the paved pedestrian access. The section
should be updated accordingly.
c. The pavement widening should be done in accordance with our Road and Bridge
Standards, WP -2 detail. The WP -2 detail should be added to the plan set or the typical
road section should incorporate the detail.
5. Sheet C -12--
a. The sight distance triangle detail that has been provided is incorrect. See appendix F,
page F -35, of the VDOT Road Design Manual.
If you need further -Information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(434) 422 -9894.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. Plaster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
September 14, 2015
Ms. Megan Yaniglos
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP- 2015 -00043 Fifth St. Place - Final Site Plan
Dear Ms. Yaniglos,
We have reviewed the Final Site Plan for Fifth St. Place, as submitted by RK &K, with a signature date of
July 31, 2015 and have the following comments:
Sheet C -07A:
a. To help guide turning movements we recommend extending the raised median towards
5 "' Street Extended (should be 2' from the edge of travel way). The engineer will need to
demonstrate that the raised island does not conflict with the left turn movements.
b. Within the entrance radii, the east and west side, a 4' buffer strip should also be provided
between the back of curb and the sidewalk.
c. On the west side of the entrance the sidewalk should extend to the end of the curb and
gutter.
d. We recommend scheduling a meeting to discuss the proposed guardrail (see attachment):
i. The existing double face guardrail, on the west side of the entrance, should be
extended to the tangent portion of the entrance radii and a parallel terminal
(Crash - cushion attenuating terminal (CAT -350)) installed.
ii. On the east side of the entrance, at the tangent portion at approximately station
14 +00, a GR -11 should be installed. The new guardrail should be double sided
and constructed so that the face of the rail is flush with the face of curb. At the
terminal end, at approximate station I7 +75, a GR -9 should be installed. Since
there are currently no terminals approved for use in conjunction with curbs the
curb should drop to a 2" height for approximately 50' in advance of the end of
the terminal so that the vehicle is at the appropriate height when contact is made.
For a parallel terminal the 2" height should be carried an additional 12' beyond
the upstream end of the terminal, and the end of the terminal should be offset 1'
to keep the impact head behind the face of curb. A detail of the curb transition
should be provided. See our VDOT Guardrail Installation Training (GRIT)
Manual for additional information.
iii. It is understood the proposed road is private, however, we recommend installing
CG -7, along the throat of the proposed entrance, so that the guardrail can be
constructed flush with the face of curb. It can then extend towards the entrance
onto 5t" Street extended, turn behind the proposed sidewalk and terminate (GR-
11) somewhere behind the proposed side walk along 5 "' Street. If that portion of
guardrail extends into the right -of -way it will not be maintained by VDOT. If
sidewalk is to be added in the future the grading should be adjusted so that the
guardrail is placed a minimum of 8' from the face of curb.
e. At approximate station 14 +00, the proposed/existing sign labels are missing.
2. Sheet C -0717: A note, for the Entrance/Tum Lane pavement section, should be added stating
"Field verified CBR test results are to be provided to VDOT and approval of the final design shall
be obtained prior to the construction of the pavement ".
3. Sheet C -08C:
a. Details of the bore pipe installation should be provided.
b. The casing should be 2X the diameter of the waterline.
c. It is believed that rock is within the proposed jack and bore area. We recommend a
geotechnical investigation be performed.
d. How will the pits be accessed? (i.e.: trench boxes or stepping back the grade)
e. If the pits (within/near the ROW) are being graded/stepped back then they should be
graphically graded out to adequately show their sizing, there effect on the existing roads
and if grading/construction easements are necessary.
E What measures will be taken to ensure public safety, assuming that the pits cannot be
dug, the casing bored, and backfilled on the same day. Will the boring pit/receiving pit
remain open after work hours?
g. The class of the encasement pipe should be provided.
h. Boring and receiving pits should have sump pits to contain auger fluids if vacuum
devices are not operated throughout the boring operation. Therefore, the removal and
final disposition of excess fluids or spoils is the responsibility of the boring contractor.
i. The work area should be restored to pre - construction conditions or as identified on the
final plans.
j. The maintenance of traffic plan should incorporate the jack and bore operation.
4. Sheet C -09A and C -0913: it would be helpful if the road stationing was included on the grading
sheets while comparing the 5"' Street cross- sections.
5. Sheet C -1013: the limits of the right -of -way should be shown on the waterline profile (jack and
bore section)
6. Storm sewer, inlet and HGL computations should be provided. A detail showing the method of
connecting to existing storm sewer structures should be provided.
7. A typical road section should be provided and include the following: the pavement structure
including thickness and material of each Iayer graphically shown, the width of each travel
lane/turn lane from the edge of pavement to the edge of pavement, curb and gutter type, sidewalk
width and cross - slope, buffer width and cross -slope between the back of curb and sidewalk,
Iocation and width of right -of -way lines, clear zone, roadway name, design speed and design
standard used.
8. Sheet C -12:
a. The intersection sight line triangle should also include the offset from edge of travel way
and centerline offset.
b. The maintenance of traffic plan layout should be extended to include the limits of the
advance warning signs. Sign spacing's should be to scale on the plan and dimensioned
accordingly.
If you need further information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(434) 422 -9894.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. P aster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
�YpF AL��,
4 �P
V l C?
t -1.
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Michael Campbell (mcampbell @DRP- LLC.com)
From: Megan Yaniglos- Principal Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: September 2, 2015
Subject: SDP - 2015 -043 Fifth Street Place- Final Site Plan
The Planner for the Planning Services 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.]
Requirements:
1. [32.5.2] It appears that some of the landscape sheets are missing. Provide the whole site
at 20 scale. Also, label the plants on each sheet and not just the overall sheet.
2. [32.5.2 (n); 4.16] Provide detailed information for the amenities /recreation areas. There
are certain requirements for the tot lot that need to be noted on the plan. Also provide
information as to what amenities will be provided within the clubhouse besides the
pool.
1
4.16.2 _- NUUNIMLTM FACEL TIES
The following facilities shall be provided inthin the recreational area:
4.16.2.1 One (1) tot lot shall be provided for the first thirty (30) units and for each additional fifty (50)
units and shall contain equipment which provides an amenity equivalent to:
One (1) siring (four (4) seats)
One (1) slide
Tim) (2) climbers
One (1) buckabout or whirl
Tim) (2) benches_
Substitutions of equipment or facilities may be approved by the director of planning and
caumurnity development, provided they offer a recreational amenity equivalent to the facilities
listed above, and arm appropriate to the needs of the occupants_
Each tot lot shall consist of at least two thousand (2,000) square feet and shall be fenced, wfhere
determined necessary by the director of planning and ceimninuty development, to proMe a safe
environruent for young children.
4.16.2.2 One -half (112) court for basketball shall be provided for each one hundred (100) units, consisting
of a thirty (3 0) foot by thirty (3 0) foot area of four (4) inch 21 -A base and one and one half (1 1.'2)
inches bituminous concrete surface_, and a basketball backboard and net installed at regulation
height.
3. [32.5.2 (p)] Provide screening detail information for the dumpster and recycling area,
including information on the fence and /or landscaping. This information needs to be
shown on the site plan, not just the architectural plans.
4. [32.7.2.3] Sidewalk should be provided along one side of the entrance to connect the
internal sidewalks with those provided along 5th Street.
5. [32.7.9.4(b)(1)] Show the location and type of protective fencing for the trees to remain
on the landscape plan.
6. [32.7.9.4(c)(1)] Indicate on the landscape plan the type of trees contained in the
wooded areas to remain (ie deciduous, evergreen, mix)
7. [32.7.9.4(c)(3)] Show /label where the wetlands are located on the overall landscape
sheet.
8. [32.7.9.6(a)] Provide calculations for these requirements. How much /what is required?
How much /what is provided? Also, only trees are shown in the parking areas, provide
shrubs.
32.7.9.6 L_ NDSC APD G NIXMIN A PARKDti G AREA
The nritlinnun landscaping standards for each parking area having five (5) or more parking spaces are as follows
a. Mnimum area. An area of at least fire (5) percent of the paved parking and vehicular circulation area shall
be landscaped Aith trees or shrubs- Neither the areas of street trees and shnlbs required by sections
32.7.9.5(d) and (e) nor shrubs planted behveen a parking area and a building on the site shall be counted
toward the rnmimum area landscaped area for a parking area_
b. Types ofplant materials_ The plant materials may be a mixture of shade trees and shnibs and shall include
one (1) large or medium shade tree per ten (10) parking spaces or portion thereof. if five (5) spaces or
18 -32 -36
Zoning Supplement #76, 1 -1 -13
.4LSE- Ii4RLE COI N'TY CODE
more. The shade trees shall be selected from a ciurent list of recommended large shade trees approved by
the agent or other species approved by the agent and the agent may allow trees smaller than medium shade
trees to be planted when site conditions -%var ant smaller trees. All shade trees to be planted shall meet the
specifications of the American Association of Nurser�,men_
9. [32.7.9.8] Provide calculations for this requirement. How much is required? How much
is provided?
32.7.9.8 TREE CANOPY
The tree canopy required to be established and maintained is subject to the follo «-iug:
a. Minimum tree canopy. Each site shall have a tree canopy covering the miuunium percentage of the site as
follows:
1. Commercial or industrial uses_ If the site is to be developed for commercial or industrial uses, the
mininnun tree canopy is ten (10) percent.
2. Residential uses, density of 20 chvelling units per acre or mole. If the site is to be developed for
residential uses at a gross density of twenty (20) dwelling units per acre or more, the minimum
tree canopy is ten (10) percent.
3. Residential uses, density' of benveen 10 and 20 dtinelling units per acre_ If the site is to be
developed for residential uses at a gross density of more than ten (10) but less than twenty (20)
dwelling units per acre or more, the nurumurn tree canopy is fifteen (15) percent.
4. Residential uses, density of 10 dinelling units per- acre or less. If the site is to be developed for
residential uses at a gross density of ten (10) dwelling units per acre or less; the muumunr tree
canopy is twenty (20) percent.
Composition of tree canopy_ The tree canopy required by subsection (a) shall be composed of all areas of
the site that would be cowered by trees and other plant materials exceeding five (5) feet in height at a
maturity of ten (10) years after planting. The trees and plant materials composing the tree canopy are those
required to be planted under sections 32.7.9.5, 32.7.9.6 and 32.7.9.7, the existing trees preserved tinder
section 32.7.9.4(b), and all additional trees selected from a recommended species list approved by the agent
that are planted in order to satisfy the niiriimum tree canopy coverage required by subsection (a)_
c. Calculating the area of the site. For the purposes of calculating the area of the site to determine the
mmunu n tree canopy coverage under subsection (a), the area of the site shall be its gross acreage less; at
the option of the developer, one or more of the follotring on the site-
1. Farnn land or other areas devoid of wooded areas on June 20, 1990_
2. Recreation areas required under section 4.16.
3. open space areas required under section 4.7_
4. Land dedicated to public use_
5. Playing fields and recreation areas provided at schools, day care centers, and other similar uses.
6. Ponds or lakes determined by the agent to be a desirable open space amenity.
7. Areas required to preserve wetlands, flood plain or other areas required to be maintained in a
natural state by this chapter or other applicable law.
S. other areas approved by the agent hider section 323.5 _
d_ Deductions cumulative. The deductions alloyed by subsection (c) are cumulative but shall not be
duplicative.
Canopy bonus_ Where existing trees are maintained, the agent shall grant a canopy bonus as follows:
The area of canopy coverage shall be calcidated at a maturity of twenty (20) years after planting;
and
The area calculated in subsection (e)(1) shall be multiplied by a factor of 1.25.
10. [32.7.9.9] Only show the landscaping that is required by the oridinance and /or ARB. All
landscaping shown on the plan that is not installed will need to be bonded prior to the
first Certificate of Occupancy, so it would be beneficial to remove everything that is not
a requirement from the site plan.
0
Please contact Megan Yaniglos at the Department of Community Development 296-
5832 ext. 3004 for further information.
Lrf2C;l1�ZA
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
July 22, 2015
Michael M Campbell /Dominion Realty Partners
101 N 5th Street, Suite B
Richmond Va 23219
RE: ARB201500066 Fifth Street Place
Dear Mr. Campbell,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on July 20, 2015, completed a review of the
above -noted request to construct multi - family housing consisting of 200 apartment units in 5 buildings with
associated site improvements. The Board offered the following comments for the benefit of the applicant's next
submittal. Please note that the following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional
comments may be added or eliminated based on further review and changes to the plan.
1. Note the height of the mechanical equipment located at each building. Revise the landscape plan and
schedule to identify the screening plants proposed for the equipment. Ensure that the plants will fully
screen the equipment from view.
2. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to both the architectural and site plans.
3. If exterior building- mounted lights are proposed, include them in the lighting drawings.
4. Provide the 20 scale landscape plans to cover the entire development. Be sure all utilities and
easements are shown on the landscape plan.
5. Check and correct the quantity of CK and PL in the plant schedule and on the plan.
6. Clarify the reason for the off -site CK located at the west end of the 5t" Street frontage. Off -site
grading and planting require easements.
7. Shift utilities to eliminate conflicts between landscaping and utilities /easements without reducing
the quantity of proposed plants.
8. Add a large shade tree to fill the gap in street trees between buildings 3 and 4, or clarify why the
gap is required.
9. Indicate how the landscape on the slope down to buildings 3, 4 and 5 from the EC will be handled.
10. Limit the number of proposed plants for any one species to 25% of the total proposed for that plant
type (tree, shrub).
11. Provide retaining wall details on the plans.
12. Identify on the plan top -of -wall and bottom -of -wall elevations for the retaining walls.
13. Coordinate the tree save and grading shown south of the clubhouse.
14. Provide site sections showing the building profiles and topography at each condition around the
perimeter of the site that fronts on an Entrance Corridor. Perspective views should be provided in
order to more accurately describe the relationship of the buildings and landscape to the EC.
15. Reconsider elevations of Building 5 to be more in keeping with the earlier color rendering presented at
the previous meeting. All building elevations fronting on the EC require the same appropriate level of
detail.
16. Applicant has indicated that satellite dishes will not be allowed on the building.
17. Revised drawings addressing #s 14 and 15 may return for a work session.
You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms,
checklists and schedules are available on -line at www.albemarle.org /ARB.
Revised drawings addressing the comments listed above are required. Include updated ARB revision dates on
each drawing. Please provide a memo including detailed responses indicating how each comment has been
addressed. If changes other than those requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also.
Highlighting the changes in the drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Principal Planner
Cc: Gambit LLC & Snow Paws LLC
Po Box 6846
Charlottesville Va 22906
File
-4440.
sta
6.1
1.:14K17;1
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4126
March 30, 2015
Michael Campbell
101 N. 5th Street,Suite B
Richmond,VA 23219
RE:SDP-2015-005 Fifth Street Place-Initial Site Plan
Mr. Campbell:
The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative approval to the
above referenced site plan.
This approval shall be valid for a period of five(5)years from the date of this letter,
provided that the developer submits a final site plan for all or a portion of the site
within one(1)year after the date of this letter as provided in section 32.4.3.1 of
Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and thereafter diligently pursues
approval of the final site plan.
The final site plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the
following items are received:
1. A final site plan that satisfies all of the requirements of section 32.6 of
Chapter 18 of the Code. 2. A fee of$1,500.
Please submit 10 copies of the final plans to the Community Development
Department.The assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all
reviewing agencies (except for ACSA,please submit copies directly to them as
stated in their comments).Once you receive the first set of comments on the final
site plan, please work with each reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements.
The final site plan will not be approved until the following conditions are met:
1
The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final
site plan for signature until tentative approvals for the following conditions have
been obtained:
Planning Division Approval of(2 copies):
1. A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
Acknowledged
2. A landscape plan meeting the requirements of section 32.7.9 of Chapter 18 of
the Code, including a tree conservation checklist.
Acknowledged
3. [32.5.2] Provide an overall sheet at a different scale that shows the entirety of
the site and development
An Overall Plan Sheet has been added (1"=60')to the set
4. [32.5.2(a)] Provide a note stating the magisterial district on the cover sheet. (Scottsville)
Added to the Cover Sheet as required
5. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the percentage and acreage of open space
Note stating Open Space Area of 11.42 Ac. (equaling 70.2%) has been added to the Cover Sheet
6. [32.5.2 (b)] Setbacks for many of the buildings that are listed are incorrect. For every one
foot over 35 feet of building height,an additional 2 feet must be provided.So for the three
story buildings 28 feet of additional setback is required. For the four story buildings 38 feet
is required.
a. Building#1 has 63 feet minimum.
b. Building#2 has 53 feet minimum.
c. Building#3 along 5th Street side has 53 feet minimum and along 64 has 53 feet as well.
d. Building#4 has 43 feet minimum.
e. Building#5 has 53 feet minimum.
Building setback and labels have been adjusted throughout the project as required.
7. [32.5.2 (c)] Will the development be phased? If so, provide a phasing plan
This development will not be phased
8. [32.5.2 (e)] Revise the limits of disturbance boundaries.There are a number of areas where
the grading goes into the tree save areas.
Grading and Disturbed area boundaries have been adjusted accordingly
9. [32.5.2 (e)]Show the utilities on the landscape plan to assure there are no conflicts
between required and proposed landscaping and the utilities.
Acknowledged and addressed.
10. [32.5.2(n)] Provide the dimensions and materials for the walkways and loading/dumpster
areas.
Detailed information for concrete surfaces has been added to sheets C-02 and C-07F
11. [32.5.2(n)]The maximum footcandles at the property line/ROW line is 0.5. Revise to meet
the requirement of 4.17.
2
law
Acknowledged and addressed.
12. [32.5.2 (n);4.16] Provide a justification that includes the intended occupants of the apartments
for the recreation amenities that are proposed that are different from those required in the
ordinance.The recreational amenities within the parking lot are not acceptable as usable
space.
Also,a tot lot or another amenity is recommended outside of the clubhouse and pool. It seems
that there are a number of parking spaces that are not required, and an area near the
clubhouse could be reduced in parking to provide for a tot lot or similar amenity.
A Tot Lot Area has been designated between Building numbers 3 and 4. Recreational Area
designations in parking areas have been removed as requested.See sheet C-07 for designated
areas.
13. [32.5.2 (p)] Provide screening detail information for the dumpster and recycling area,
including information on the fence and/or landscaping.
Refer to Architectural Plans for Dumpster/Recycling Area Plans/Details. Proposed grading of
this area is shown on sheet C-09C.
14. [32.7.2.3] Provide sidewalks along the entirety of the frontage of the property to connect
to existing trails and sidewalks.
Sidewalks, in accordance with accordance with the Geometric Design Standards for Urban
Minor Arterial Street Systems (GS-6), have now been added to the ROW improvements
Please contact Megan Yaniglos at 296-5832 if you have questions or require additional information.
Engineering Division Approval of(1 copy of site plan;WPO plan number stated in application):
1. Existing topography does not appear to match site. House has been razed and stockpile of
soil has been constructed on site. Topography will need to be updated and certified.
Topography in the referenced area has been updated to show the existing stockpile
2. Water protection plans are reviewed under separate application and will be removed from
site plan package.
Acknowledged
3. Army Corp of Engineers permit to disturb wetlands will be required for final plan approval.
Acknowledged and attached on sheet C-15
4. 15"stormwater conveyance pipe are the minimum allowed per ACDSM. link to ACDSM:
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/community_developm
e
nt/forms/design_standards_manual/Albemarle_County_Design_Standards_Manual_02Dec20
14
.pdf Please up-size the 12" pipes to 15" pipes.
The minimum storm pipe now being proposed is 15"as required.
Please contact Max Greene at 296-5832 if you have questions or require additional information.
ACSA approval to include(3 copies):
3
411100 *4110
1. RWSA Wastewater Capacity Certification will be required during the final site plan stage.
During the final site plan stage the ACSA will apply for the capacity certification.
Acknowledged
2. Submit 3 copies of the final site plan along with water and sewer data sheets directly to the
ACSA for utility construction review.The review package shall be addressed to the attention
of Jeremy Lynn, P.E.
Acknowledged
3. Additional fire hydrants may be required to meet the fire code.
Acknowledged
Please contact Alex Morrison at 977-4511 ext 116 if you have questions or require additional
information.
E911 approval to include(1 copy):
1. The applicant should contact this office with a list of three (3) proposed road names for
approval before final plans are submitted.
Please contact Andrew Slack at 296-5832 if you have questions or require additional information.
Fire&Rescue approval to include(1 copy):
Based on plans dated 2/2/15
1. Per VSFPC 503.1.1 An Approved fire access road shall extend to with in 150 ft of all the
first floor. Exception Unless an approved Sprinkler system is installed at which the
distance is increase to 200 ft.
Sprinkler systems are being proposed within the proposed buildings and distances (noted
above) have been verified.
2. Per VSFPC 503.2.4 Radii in an approved Fire Access road shall have a minimum radii of 25 ft.
SU-40 truck template has been run and adjustments have been made wherever necessary to
provide access.
3. Per VSFPC 912.2 FDC location shall be located on the street side of the building and in a
location that when hooked to a hydrant the hose doesn't obstruct other responding
apparatus.
FDC's have been placed throughout the project as required.
4. Per VSFPC 507.5.1.1 All FDC's shall be located with in 100 ft per travel way of a Hydrant.
This hydrant shall not count towards the 400 ft spacing per travel way for that building.
FDC's and dedicated hydrants have been added throughout the project as required
5. Per VSFPC 507.5.1 Hydrants shall be installed on 400ft spacing per travel way
Acknowledged and verified
6. Per VSFPC 506.1 A Knox Box shall be required on each building. Location to be
determined during construction.
Knox Box locations have been added to each building along with a note stating:
"EMERGENCY KEY BOX(KNOX BOX SYSTEM)TO BE INSTALLED PER DIRECTION OF THE
4
FIRE MARSHAL(TYP)"
7. Fire Flow test required before final approval
Acknowledged
Please contact Robbie Gilmer at 296-5833 if you have questions or require additional information.
ARB approval to include(1 copy):
At its March 16,2015 meeting,the ARB voted unanimously to forward the following
recommendations to the Agent for the Site Review Committee:
All comments will be addressed on next ARB submission
• Regarding requirements to satisfy the design guidelines as per§ 18-30.6.4(2), (3)and (5):
1. In areas where wooded area to remain is used to meet tree requirements along 5th Street
Extended, identify existing individual large shade and ornamental trees on the plan by size
and species to show that the minimum requirement can be met.If the requirement can't be
met, show additional new trees to be planted to meet the requirement.
2. Shift utilities to eliminate conflicts between landscaping and utilities/easements
without reducing the quantity of proposed plants.
3. Ensure that pipes are located to eliminate conflicts with trees along the entrance drive,
while meeting the 40'on center tree requirement.
4. Add plants along the retaining wall located west of the clubhouse to soften the appearance
of the wall as viewed from the 5th Street Extended corridor.
5. Indicate on the plans the manufacturer,size and color of the block proposed for the
retaining walls. Provide details on the plan showing that wall construction will allow for the
planting between the terraced walls illustrated north of Buildings 1 and 2.
• Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the
guidelines: None.
• Regarding recommended conditions of initial plan approval: A Certificate of Appropriateness
is required prior to final site plan approval.
1. Submit elevations addressing all sides of each building. Ensure that blankness is not
a characteristic of the design.
2. Add the standard window glass note to the architectural drawings:"Visible light
transmittance (VLT)shall not drop below 40%.Visible light reflectance (VLR)shall not
exceed 30%."
3. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to both the architectural and site plans:
"Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated."
4. Provide the photometric plan at a larger size to increase legibility.
5. Revise the lighting plan to eliminate spillover at the property line in excess of.5 footcandles.
6. Revise the lighting plan using an LLF of 1.0.
7. Identify the light pole and light fixture colors on the lighting plan. Bronze is recommended.
8. Add the standard lighting note to the plan: "Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp
that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged
or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent
5
4411.0 '411.00
roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential
or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle."
9. In areas where wooded area to remain is used to meet tree requirements along 5th Street
Extended, identify existing individual large shade and ornamental trees on the plan by size
and species to show that the minimum requirement can be met. If the requirement can't be
met, show additional new trees to be planted to meet the requirement.
10. Show existing and proposed utilities and easements on the landscape plan.
11. Shift utilities to eliminate conflicts between landscaping and utilities/easements
without reducing the quantity of proposed plants.
12. Ensure that pipes are located to eliminate conflicts with trees along the entrance drive,
while meeting the 40' on center tree requirement.
13. Add trees along the retaining wall located west of the clubhouse to soften the appearance
of the wall as viewed from the 5th Street Extended corridor.
14. Indicate on the site plan the manufacturer,size and color of the block proposed for the
retaining walls. Provide details on the plan showing that wall construction will allow for the
planting between the walls illustrated north of Buildings 1 and 2.
• Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading
permit: None.
Please contact Margaret Malisewski at 296-5832 if you have questions or require
additional information.
VDOT approval to include(2 copies):
1. The edge of pavement, pavement markings, ROW lines(along 5th Street as well as 1-64),
etc., should be clearly labeled.
Acknowledged and addressed
2. The proposed improvements, along 5th Street Ext.,should be designed in accordance with
the Geometric Design Standards for Urban Minor Arterial Street Systems(GS-6). For
example the proposed curb and gutter section should be CG-7 and the minimum widths
for a paved or graded shoulder should be clearly incorporated into the design.
Acknowledged and addressed
3. A turn lane and taper warrant should be provided.The proposed taper,turn lane length
and width should be dimensioned and the curb ends should be nosed down.
Acknowledged and addressed
4. Proposed spot elevations should be provided along the entrance,the turn lane and the taper
to ensure positive drainage.
Acknowledged and addressed
5. CBR values will need to be obtained, prior to the turn lane construction,in order to determine
the minimum structure requirement for the pavement.The typical section should
match/exceed existing.When the turn lane and taper are constructed it should be in
accordance with the WP-2 detail which can be found in the VDOT,2008 Road and Bridge
Standards.The entire surface should be milled and overlaid from the right hand westbound
lane to the proposed pavement widening. Pavement markings and/or markers should be
replaced as necessary.
6
Acknowledged and addressed
6. Additional ROW should be provided,a minimum of 3', behind the asphalt trail.
A 3' Right of Way Dedication is now being proposed and has been added to the plan.
7. We recommend relocating the proposed CG-12's further into the proposed development
near the PC/PT's of the entrance radii. CG-12 details should be provided.
CG-12's have been relocated to ER's as suggested
8. We recommend reducing the width of the ingress/egress lanes to 24'.The lanes should
be clearly marked.
Width of the proposed entrance has been revised
9. A pavement marking and signage plan should be provided.
Markings and Signage have been added to sheets C-07A and C-07B
10. A Maintenance of Traffic Plan (MOT)shall be provided during the plan review process.
The allowable work hours for lane closures are Monday-Sunday 7:00 PM-3:00 PM (next
day).
MOT plan has been included with this submittal, on sheet C-12
11. Culvert computations should be provided in accordance with Chapter 8 of the VDOT
Drainage Manual.
Computations have been included with this submittal. Culvert has been redesigned
12. The offset,for the height of eye,should be dimensioned on the plan view on page C-12 and
the proposed and existing grading clearly labeled on the profile.
Acknowledged and addressed
13. The existing guardrail is not a standard practice.Specific details concerning the guardrail
are currently being discussed with NWRO
Acknowledged
14. Additional comments may be generated during final review.
Please contact Shelly Plaster at(434)422-9894 if you have questions or require additional information.
Inspection approval to include(1 copy):
Based on plans stamped February 2,2015.
1. Provide barrier-free parking spaces,with related striped access aisles and curb cuts as follows.
A total of nine barrier-free spaces are required for the site:
Acknowledged and addressed
2. Rearrange one of the two spaces at the Clubhouse to be van-accessible.
Spaces have been revised as requested
3. Provide one barrier-free parking space,each,for Buildings 1,2,3 and 4.
revised
4. Provide three barrier-free parking spaces for Building 5. One of these spaces must be
van- accessible.
revised
Please contact Jay Schlothauer at 296-5832 if you have questions or require additional
information.
7