The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP200900016 Review Comments 2009-04-10IRGI^`t s_ m 1 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Gerald Gatobu, Principal Planner From:John P. Diez, Engineering Review Division: Current Development Date:April 10, 2009 Subject: SDP200900016 North Fork Regional Pump Station. - Preliminary Site Plan The preliminary site plan for North Fork Regional Pump Station., submitted on March 24, 2009, has been reviewed. Current Development Engineering has the following comments: Preliminary Site Plan Comments 1. Please revise drainage area #2 and move and relocate the Point of Analysis #2 away from the floodplain. In addition, please submit a modified simple method spreadsheet with the updated drainage area. 2. Please provide site distance triangles for the proposed entrance. Final Site Plan Comments 3. A Water Protection Ordinance application must be submitted with an Erosion and Sediment Control plan. Plans should show all disturbed areas, including any pipes being installed for this plan. 4, AL$ E1r 1 IRGI COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 DATE: April 13 2009 Charles Luck P.E. [Whitman Requardt & Associates] 9030 Stoney Pointe Parkway Suite 220 Richmond, VA, 23235 RE: SDP -2009 -00016 North Fork Regional Pump Station Preliminary Dear Sir, The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Preliminary comments for the following divisions of the Department of Community Development and other agencies, as applicable, are attached: Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner) Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Engineer) Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). (Pending) Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA). Albemarle County Geographic and Data Services (GDS) Albemarle County Fire and Rescue Comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed, and should not be considered final. However, the Site Review Committee has attempted to identify all issues that could affect approval of the proposed project. Please make the revisions that have been identified as necessary for preliminary approval by the Site Review Committee. If you choose not to make the requested revisions, please submit in writing justification for not incorporating such revisions. Submit eight (8) full size copies and one (1) 11" x 17" copy to the Department of Community Development including responses to each of the attached comments of the Site Review Committee by Monday April 27 2009. Failure to submit this infornation by this date will result in suspension of the review schedule. Review will resume when revisions are submitted along with a reinstatement fee of $65. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerel meow - ate erald Gatobu, Principal Planner County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Current Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 -4596 Phone: (434)296 -5832 Ext 3385 Fax: (434)972 -4126 F } F .47,p trAr191 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Charles Luck From:Gerald Gatobu, Principal Planner Division: Zoning and Current Development Date:April 10, 2009 Subject: SDP2009 -00016 North Fork Regional Pump Station Preliminary The County of Albemarle Division of Zoning and Current Development will grant or recommend approval of the preliminary site plan referred to above once the following comments have been addressed: [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] 32.5.6 The preliminary site plan shall contain the following information: a. Zoning; descriptions of all variances, zoning proffers and bonus factors applicable to the site; Please include the zoning proffers applicable to tax map and parcel number 32 -6A on the site plan 1ZMA 98 -27 and ZMA 95 -041. There is a proposed trail (per the proffers for ZMA 98 -27) that will be located right next to the pump station. Magisterial district; this property is in the Rio Magisterial District and not Rivanna Magisterial District. County and State; Indicate on the preliminary site plan the county and state (Albemarle County and Virginia) where the property is found. b. Written schedules or data as necessary to demonstrate that the site can accommodate the proposed use, including: Maximum amount of impervious cover on the site; please indicate the maximum amount of impervious cover on the site. e. Existing landscape features as described in section 32.7.9.4.c.Please add an existing landscape features sheet to the preliminary site plan that meets the criteria set forth in section 32.7.9.4c. 4.17] Any /All proposed outdoor lighting must meet the requirements of section 4.17 of the zoning ordinance. 1 Ol ALg, I 1IRGINI County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Gerald Gatobu, Principal Planner From: John P. Diez, Engineering Review Division: Current Development Date:April 10, 2009 Subject: SDP200900016 North Fork Regional Pump Station. - Preliminary Site Plan The preliminary site plan for North Fork Regional Pump Station., submitted on March 24, 2009, has been reviewed. Current Development Engineering has the following comments: Preliminary Site Plan Comments 1. Please revise drainage area #2 and move and relocate the Point of Analysis #2 away from the floodplain. In addition, please submit a modified simple method spreadsheet with the updated drainage area. 2. Please provide site distance triangles for the proposed entrance. Final Site Plan Comments 3. A Water Protection Ordinance application must be submitted with an Erosion and Sediment Control plan. Plans should show all disturbed areas, including any pipes being installed for this plan. Serv Authlr y JCNI TO: Gerald Gatobu FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer DATE: April 10, 2009 RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: North Fork Regional Pump Station SDP200900016 TM 32 -6A The below checked items apply to this site. X 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for: X A. Water and sewer B. Water only C. Water only to existing structure D. Limited service X 2. A 12 inch water line is located approximately 120' distant. 3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is Gpm + at 20 psi residual. X 4. An 6 inch sewer line is located approximately 40'distant. 5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed. X 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. X 10. Final sewer plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative 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: The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows: meter locations water line size waterline locations sewer line size sewer line locations expected wastewater flows easements expected water demands 168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698 www.serviceauthoriy.org Application #: r SDP200900016 Short Review Comments Project Name: North Fork Regional Pump Station Prelim Preliminary — Non - residential Date Completed:04/08/2009 Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: NO OBJECTION. Date Completed:04/06/2009 Reviewer:James Barber Fire Rescue Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Indicate the location of fire hydrants. Hydrants must be located within 400 feet of the building by way of a prepared travel way. Date Completed:04/10/2009 Reviewer:John Paul Diez Engineer Z &CD Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: SRC 4/16/09 Date Completed:04/06/2009 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer Inspections Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: No Objection Date Completed:04/10/2009 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: This proposal is scheduled for review by the ARB on May 18, 2009. Comments will be provided after that meeting. Panes 1 nn runty of Alhamarla PrinfPri nrr TIIaCria\/ Anril 1d 71)1Q COMMONWEALTH of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY OFFICE 701 VDOT WAY CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911 DAVID S. EKERN, P.E. COMMISSIONER. April 15 2009 Mr. Glenn Brooks Department of Engineering and Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Subject: Site Review Meeting Comments April 16, 2009 site review meeting Dear Mr. Brooks: Below are VDOT's comments on the Site Plans for the April 1 6 2009 Site Review Conunittee Meeting: SDP - 2009 - 00016 North Fork Regional Punip Station — Preliminary (Gerald Gatobu) 1. There are proffers by both the North Fork Research Park and Northpoint to add an additional southbound lane to route 29 at the location where this plan proposes a gravity sewer. No plans have been reviewed for the widening of the road but efforts need to be made to avoid conflicts. If widening takes place to the outside of Route 29, a 12 foot lane and a 13 foot shoulder will be added. Utility structures must be placed outside of these lanes and shoulders. Proposed structures 27 and 28 appear to be conflicting. It is recommended that if the line must be placed within the VDOT Right of Way, it is located in the outer 3 to 5 feet of the Right of Way in accordance with VDOT's Land Use Permit Manual, 24VAC 30- 150 -1310. 2. Final plans will need to include a pavement design and entrance profile. A detail for the pavement widening will be required and a design for the break in the guardrail needs to be shown on the plan. SDP - 2009 00017 Humagen Fertility Diagnostics — minor (Gerald Gatobu) Final plan needs to include design and drainage details for the pipe proposed within the existing Route 1146 Right of Way. SDP - 2009 - 00018 Blue Ridge Shopping Center — Major (Elizabeth Marotta) An easement is needed from the existing DI on Route 250 to the first structure off the ROW around the 24 inch pipe. WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING SDP -2009 -00019 Lacy Mechanical Inc. — Major (Elizabeth Marotta) No comments SDP - 2009 -00020 Tabor Presbyterian Church Addition - Prelim (Summer Frederick) 1. The number of seats in the addition and the ITE trip generation numbers need to be shown on the plan. 2. Sight distances need to be shown on the existing and proposed entrances in accordance with the Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways 24VAC 30 -71 -130. 3. The proposed one way entrance needs to be dimensioned as shown in 24VAC -30 -71 -160 of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways Commercial /Private Entrance Design Illustrations. The minimum width is 14 feet and the minimum radii are 12.5 feet. The selected dimensions of the entrance need to accommodate the design vehicle and should be increased accordingly. One way signs will also need to be shown on the plan. Recommended dimensions for curb returns can be found in Appendix F of the VDOT Road Design Manual. 4. The two existing entrances need to be evaluated and upgraded to the current standards if found to be substandard in accordance with the requirements of section 24VAC- 30 -71- 140. 5. Tabor Street is paved with surface course asphalt. The entrances into the site must be of the same material as the road back to the ROW line or the easement line as indicated in 24VAC 30 -71 -80 of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways. 6. Profiles for entrances need to be shown as a CG -11 standard. 7. Entrance pipes should be a minimum of 15 inches in diameter for all entrances. In order to approve the use of 12 inch pipes, a hydraulic analysis will need to be submitted showing the 12 inch pipe will not cause water to overtop the road in significant storm events as described in VDOT's Drainage Manual section 8.3.3.1. SDP - 2009 -00022 Preddv Creek Park Improvements - Preliminary (Summer Frederick) 1. The connection to Route 810 needs to show a profile in accordance with the CG -11 standard. 2. Erosion control stone should be placed at each end of the proposed pipe. 3. Sight distances need to be shown at the proposed entrance in accordance with the requirements of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways, 24VAC 30 -71- 130. SDP - 2009 -00022 Preddv Creek Park Improvements - Preliminary (Summer Frederick) 1. The connection to Route 641 needs to show a profile in accordance with the CG -11 standard. 2. Erosion control stone should be placed at the oulet end of the proposed pipe. 3. Sight distances need to be shown at the proposed entrance in accordance with the requirements of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways, 24VAC 30 -71- 130. SUB- 2009 -00049 Free Bridle Subdivision —Final (Patrick Lawrence) Access easements should be provided from Olympia Drive to TMP78 -9A, Residue TMP - 78-57B and TMP 78 -10A through the proposed lots E, F and Residue of TMP -78 -11 for WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Hi.' 1 . 1' 'I :,. :7,illl its , )(HI NI, !' rift 7'fJ' { ;i(';'PiJttal 1'!1[11j11i :11 iiFt1 -- Y.t? "\ ((.Cr;111t 1;iircl7tli 1I ill. l 1:,ti P.11 11 - , . ' \ „) 1 "1111 i i i,1 i ?I 1111-11'.. ,,u.!1_ 1'1 1_11 n; :L11 t' . i!.. 1 1P,.1 11;1 I' . . II I!I li', t: l - +:' ;`1:1:.'1{ \\ li :lill ifl. ` I )1 ) 11..,:1 ': ' it 1; I 1..'lli Oi \''...717;, Hi 'IL'CI=r11(fi1C: \\'W; S I , l I. 1 i -.... _- M'' -; i • -i, iii. I-1;7;;'i 1_1: a 1d «nt1T1111: ' 1)1 C11:1.111 11 111(1 1',1 I,".' :iL' 1': 1`c 1C :)U1:7.: - ,i - 1li1 FI CI:. I1 101 t11 F)ticili) 111 di: L 11 (1c:1: 11 111 11. 11!12 111111 4 i 2{E = ` _ -- _r11, c;;ti 44 1)l :t C'N trTlrC,t 1 . :r f (. %t +111tt 1 H; 1 ;1(2'11 ,I: .;14! 11[1'1 11',lli11L 1(21,111• H ;h.. '1111. '"', C. \'.'.11'.1. it ;'l'11t',.ti< ..... ,1iii- 1 )1 {1 1; _'_1il 11 ;hi. ;111 I iii••'1 i :VF I' .11 iii Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District April 24, 2009 706 Forest St, Ste G Charlottesville, VA 22903 975-0224 TO:Gerald Batobu Planning Department RE:Soils Report and Comments for: North Fork Regional Pump Station ik w4 ' 65C Y 4 4a 4C 3 a , D3 47G fi , . f i 65 65B 6 34 t 4 #B 0 i.\\ ":!',' N y /h5B 0C 36C ty t9 558 rw .*34 tie 4D 10 d 7 34C 40 37C3 6 4`TS 36D a. 9 _ \ 34D Chris 47E 2 Green 4 34D 34 imiuLake3oy g;, z6 tat' 1 420 4 tom983If:, xc'` 11:00„/ ` t.3 34C 4E ' 14C° F I4D ., 6D 37C3 27B 3E 76 2D14D , 14E Q 36C 76 14D 14D A 470 2C ; 13D V U 36B v 36D 5'6$16,r /ata' 37C3 10 ''a ` 1 36B i 15Q x <s '1 5.39E 1C 1 V , i56C 36C 4E Ir. , C y 34D y v v.U 9C il - water 14D i :50E I.,1`' a 34D P, 366 39E 400014010 34 40D 83 37D3 14E 86C3664 ?D 10tok, 36C 154 34E 36D 27C / SkAt water 340 276 83 1 2D h t 276 34E - k 4p 36C..ga 864 27C 27f 34D 34p i( 65C 47D w' 7 2D J V39K i 34C 47C sr/ i 27B 39p 340 t t,2 ti 94C jx 34: 7C 34D 276 6 34C r,1n,P.t. N.77 27B 4C3 E. "_a v i USDA United States Natural Prepared by: Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Department of Resources Conservation District Agriculture Conservation 434- 975 -0224 Service Soils Report SOILS REPORT FOR: North Fork Pump Station Soil Survey Area: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Unit: 3C Albemarle very stony fine sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Albemarle is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, shallow, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is fine sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a low available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 3e. The Virginia soil management group is JJ. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 10 Buncombe loamy sand Description Category: Virginia FOTG Buncombe is a nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, excessively drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loamy sand about 10 inches thick. The surface layer has a low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is rapid. It has a low available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is frequently flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 5w. The Virginia soil management group is II. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 15D Chester very stony loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Chester is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 60 inches. The land capability classification is 6s. The Virginia soil management group is D. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 27B Elioak loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Elioak is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderately slow. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 2e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 27C Elioak loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Elioak is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderately slow. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not Thomas Jefferson SWCD 1 4/24/09 flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capabilityclassificationis3e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 27D Elioak loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Elioak is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderatelyslow. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is4e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hayesville is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer isloamabout7inchesthick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeabilityismoderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is2e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 39E Hazel loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hazel is a steep, moderately deep, excessively drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 10 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderatelyrapid. It has a low available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 7e.The Virginia soil management group is JJ. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Parker is a steep, deep or very deep, somewhat excessively drained soil. Typically the surface layer is extremelystonyloamabout14inchesthick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderately rapid. It has a low available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soilisnotfloodedandisnotponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 7s. The Virginia soil management group is GG. This soil is not hydric. Small Commercial Buildings - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 3C Albemarle very stony fine Very limited sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 10 Buncombe loamy sand Very limited 15D Chester very stony loam, Very limited 15 to 25 percent slopes 27B Elioak loam, 2 to 7 percent Somewhat limited slopes l'homas Jefferson SWCD 2 4/24/09 27C Elioak loam, 7 to 15 Very limited percent slopes 27D Elioak loam, 15 to 25 Very limited percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited percent slopes 39E Hazel loam, 25 to 45 Very limited percent slopes 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 Very limited to 45 percent slopes Mapunit Hydric Rating Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 3C Albemarle very stony fine Not hydric sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 10 Buncombe loamy sand Partially hydric 15D Chester very stony loam, Not hydric 15 to 25 percent slopes 27B Elioak loam, 2 to 7 percent Not hydric slopes 27C Elioak loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 27D Elioak loam, 15 to 25 Not hydric percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric percent slopes 39E Hazel loam, 25 to 45 Not hydric percent slopes 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 Not hydric to 45 percent slopes Soil Shrink -Swell - Dominant Soil Top Depth : 0 Bottom Depth : 0 Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 3C Albemarle very stony fine 1.5 sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 10 Buncombe loamy sand 1.5 15D Chester very stony loam, 1.5 Thomas Jefferson SWCD 3 4/24/09 15 to 25 percent slopes 27B Elioak loam, 2 to 7 percent 1.5 slopes 27C Elioak loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 27D Elioak loam, 15 to 25 1.5 percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 1.5 percent slopes 39E Hazel loam, 25 to 45 1.5 percent slopes 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 1.5 to 45 percent slopes Corrosion Concrete - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 3C Albemarle very stony fine Moderate sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 10 Buncombe loamy sand Moderate 15D Chester very stony loam, High 15 to 25 percent slopes 27B Elioak loam, 2 to 7 percent Moderate slopes 27C Elioak loam, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes 27D Elioak loam, 15 to 25 Moderate percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Moderate percent slopes 39E Hazel loam, 25 to 45 High percent slopes 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 High to 45 percent slopes Corrosion Steel - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 3C Albemarle very stony fine Moderate sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes 10 Buncombe loamy sand Low Thomas Jetterson SWCD 4 4/24/09 15D Chester very stony loam, Low 15 to 25 percent slopes 27B Elioak loam, 2 to 7 percent High slopes 27C Elioak loam, 7 to 15 High percent slopes 27D Elioak loam, 15 to 25 High percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Moderate percent slopes 39E Hazel loam, 25 to 45 Low percent slopes 66E Parker very stony loam, 25 Low to 45 percent slopes Thomas Jefferson S WCD 5 4/24/09