HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800142 Review Comments 2008-10-13S
..3�l�.. dJ 3k�wt
Service Au'th4rity
TO: Elizabeth Marotta
FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer
DATE: October 13, 2008
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: Hydraulic Wash -Major
SDP200800142
TM 61 K-5-1 A
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 10" inch water line is located approximately 130' distant.
3.
Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is
Gpm + at 20 psi residual.
X
4.
An 8 inch sewer line is located approximately 22' 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.
X
9.
No plans are required.
10.
Final and 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: Provide a plumbing count to correctly size the meter.
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 #:
SDP200800142 -Short Review Comments
Project Name:Hydraulic Wash - Major -Major Amendment - -
Date Completed:
10/08/2008
Reviewer:
Eryn Brennan ARB
Review Status:
Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
The site plan will be reviewed by the ARB at the next meeting on November 3, 2008, after which 1
comments will be submitted. J
Date Completed:
10/10/2008
Reviewer:
Elizabeth Marotta Planner Z&CD
Review Status:
No Objection
Reviews Comments:
CD Planning does not have any requested revisions, but would like to note that if the proposed
light/landscaping on the north side of the parking lot is within a gas easement, permission from the
owner of the easement is required prior to any improvements or landscaping within the easement.
Date Completed:
10/02/2008
Reviewer:
John Paul Diez Engineer Z&CD
Review Status: Requested Changes
Reviews Comments: Comments:
1.) E&S plans are not required because disturbance does not exceed 10,000 square feet.
2.) SWM plans are not required because project is decreasing the impervious area.
3.) All entrances and right-of-way improvements must meet VDOT standards.
Date Completed: 10/10/2008
Reviewer: Jay Schlothauer Inspections
Review Status: No Objection
Reviews Comments: Based on plans dated September 8, 2008.
No comments or conditions.
Note: Any portion of the south wall of the proposed office addition that is within 10' of the property line
Lmust be of fire -rated construction.
C -P
VVV �
ti
Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Monday, October 13, 2008
Application #: SDP20080014k-- Short Review Comments
Project Namea Hydraulic Wash --Major Major -Amendment
Date Completed:
Reviewer: Elizabeth Marotta Planner Z&CD
Review Status: Pending
Reviews Comments:
- -1
Date Completed: 10/02/2008
Reviewer: John Paul Diez Engineer Z&CD
Review Status: Requested Changes
Reviews Comments: Comments:
1.) E&S plans are not required because disturbance does not exceed 10,000 square feet.
2.) SWM plans are not required because project is decreasing the impervious area.
3.) All entrances and right-of-way improvements must meet VDOT standards.
i
t(t jt
J)
t� R.
i'.It
4.4 a4-3�-. ✓tri /-'�, d' _ _.,
Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Tuesday, October 07, 2008
OMMONWEA L Tlil of ITFZINL,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY OFFICE
701 VDOT WAY
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911
DAVID S. EKERN, P.E.
COMMISSIONER
October 21 ", 2008
Mr. Glenn Brooks
Department of Engineering and Development
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Subject: Site Review Meeting Comments October 23`d, 2008 site review meeting
Dear Mr. Brooks:
Below are VDOT's comments on the Site Plans for the October 23`d, 2008 Site Review Committee Meeting:
SDP -2008-00134 The Meadows Expansion — Final (Summer Frederick)
1. All connections to Rte. 1230 need to be designed in accordance with VDOT's Road Design Manual and
The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways. The plans needs to include all dimensions of
proposed roads and entrances along with horizontal and vertical data.
2. Sight distances need to be shown on the plans.
3. All work within the VDOT R/W needs to be permitted by VDOT's Charlottesville Office.
4. The ROW around the cul-de-sac needs to be checked for accuracy. The ROW should not include
private structures.
5. Detectable Warning r Beds to be added to the crosswalk.
SDP -2008-00142 Hvdraulic Wash — Maior (Elizabeth Marotta)
1. The entrance needs to be constructed to The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways.
Throat widths, setbacks and grades in accordance with the CG -11 standard need to be shown on
the plan.
2. Show the locations of the CG -12's
SDP -2008-00146 Hollvmead Town Center -Area C Block 9 -Major (Gerald Gatobu)
1. Indicate whether Laurel Park Lane is proposed to be public or private. If it's public, the entrances
will need to be evaluated.
SDP -2008-00147 St. Anne's Belfield Lower / Middle School —Prelim. ( Summer Frederick
1. Pipe and ditch computations need to be submitted on the section of Route 855 that is beinc,
proposed for widening.
2. Drainage structure 17 is being proposed to be modified to accept water from the ditch in the back
of the DI. This design needs to be revised to eliminate this modified structure for maintenance
reasons.
3. Show existing and proposed ROW on the plans.
4. Show sight distance triangles at all intersections.
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
5. Entrance design must be in accordance with VDOT standard CG -11 and The Minimum Standards
of Entrances to State Highways. Profiles need to be shown on the plans.
6. All proposed pavement widening must be in accordance with VDOT's WP -2 standard. Assumed
CBR values for design purpose is 5. Materials and pavement design must be in accordance with
VDOT's Secondary Roads Pavement Design Guide.
7. Sheet C1.3 shows 2 proposed DI -7's without an outlet. Please explain this design.
8. Remove the second point of access at the eastern entrance to route 855 that accesses the middle
lot. This design does not meet the Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways and will
increase conflict points at the entrance and cause a dangerous situation.
SUB -2008-00240 Little Yellow Mountain —Final Plat (Megan Yaniglos)
1. Show sight triangles in accordance with The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways
at the proposed access to Route 684.
Please request the applicants provide a written description of revisions with re -submissions. If you have any
questions or comments, please contact me prior to sharing these comments with the applicants.
Sincerely,
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Staff Engineer
VDOT Charlottesville Residency
434-293-0011
cc Bill Fritz, David Benish, Juan Wade, Elaine Echols, Joan McDowell, Judith Wiegand, Margaret
Maliszewski, David Pennock, Francis McCall, Jon Sharp, Summer Frederick, Patrick Lawrence, and John
Giometti
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District October 24, 2008
706 Forest St, Ste G
Charlottesville. VA 22903
975-0224
• •- • I
Planning DepartmerE
RE.- Solis Report and Comments for:
Hydraulic Wash
b5B
866
+.
3' D
65B n� 1� ��,� "` ,�•�t� "h ; i
�` cr v 47D `va 271
14C 'ti 27C 27C
6 6 E 4D 34D
tA3.:tt; _. �.
..1.- .
-65C tr y U
65C
f>\Q'•:J i>t: 47D
34H
88 27C 27B
94¢: 91
656 ,,' 39C
65C94B 94C wy ` 34B
276 34D . ° <'.•
65B65C \ 94Q 34C —
27B
27C' –1— Union KId9/ 27C 27B r''r
O j Church
U
58C w I m Q 50D ' 34C
�\ I\ 65C 65C rr� t:, _f.
4C
34C 278 47D \\ _
94B 94B 5 56B
•;7a ; \
94C gA 88 278
�65C c U
47D 94C 'SSG
:, 95 27C 91 91 t
>o- b Idersgate
34
\ I U L
b C
27C 27('
39C ?
,
Berkley \1 I
-�. :`' tyj�.r 27B 27C
ri. $ a yj 39Q t
21B ".. �> 27B �„ ,..
a L . Q ra
:r,. - Holy Comfo
O P7B .34D i School ,
65C91
C \
�3 �C, \ - • -��e 966 ,H� .( 39D '. \ 276
34D
91 27B 77 M`" 34D '' kefielc
19B
t ,r
27B
• >` a 27f1
91 27B 27C O
.j'• ^, e .�.�"..y 27C ' r�
,v,'M•o-5. � � r
a 50D 88
91
-34D� 27B
88
27C •;�gO
– 1
91
' t
�.
This soil survey map was compiled by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service, and < ooperating agencies- Base
maps are of thophotographs prepared by
USDA United States Natural
�— Department of Resources
a Agriculture Conservation
Service
Prepared by: Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water
Conservation District
434-975-0224
Soils Report
SOILS REPORT FOR: Hydraulic Wash
Soil Survey Area: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map Unit: 65B Pacolet sandy loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Pacolet is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is
sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. Tile 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 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: 65C Pacolet sandy loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Pacolet is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is
sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low 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 seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land
capability classification is 4e. The Virginia soil management group is X. 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
65B Pacolet sandy loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited
percent slopes
65C Pacolet sandy loam, 7 to Very limited
15 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
Thomas Jefferson SWCD 1 10/24/08
Symbol Soil Name Rating
65B Pacolet sandy loam, 2 to 7 1.5
percent slopes
65C Pacolet sandy loam, 7 to 1.5
15 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
65B Pacolet sandy loam, 2 to 7 High
percent slopes
65C Pacolet sandy loam, 7 to High
15 percent slopes
Thomas Jetterson SWCD 2 10/24/08
�Y C) ALBS,
f Ik(sl`N
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
November 7, 2008
Dominion Development Resources
c/o Justin Shimp
172 South Pantops Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22911
RE: ARB -2008-138: Hydraulic Wash
Tax Map 61 K, Section 5, Parcel 1 A
Dear Mr. Shimp,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above noted item at its meeting on Monday,
November 3, 2008. The Board, by a vote of 4:0, approved the request, pending staff administrative approval of
the following conditions:
1. Revise the plans to show more clearly the outline of the footprint of the existing building on drawings C3
Existing Conditions/Demo Plan, C4 Site and Grading Plan, and the Landscape Plan on C5 Lighting and
Landscape Plan.
2. Revise the plans on C4 Site and Grading Plan and C5 Lighting and Landscape Plan to show how the
addition will align with the existing building and sidewalk, and be consistent on all the plans.
3. Correct the number of cherry laurels proposed along the north lot line from 14 to 12, as shown on the plan
and stated in the plant list. Incorporate shrubs and other planting elements into the landscaping around
the trees in front of the proposed and existing building. Correct the number of dwarf bayberry listed in the
plant list from 13 to 17.
4. Revise the drawings to show how the cistern and any other elements of the roof rainwater collection
system proposed on the north side of the building will be screened. Provide a fence that matches the style
and color of the existing fence on the adjacent property. Provide plants on the EC side of the fence.
5. Show utility easements on the landscape plan on Sheet A1.0. If the proposed light fixture is located within
the utility easement, provide documentation from the gas company that there is no objection to placing the
light fixture in the proposed location. Alternatively, shift the pole out of the easement.
6. Revise the architectural drawings to show the proposed location of the new wall sign and its relationship to
the existing structure and signage. Provide complete details on the proposed wall sign and reference the
sign checklist for requirements. Provide color and material samples. A non -illuminated or exterior -lit panel
sign is preferred. Recognize that the proposed signs will become part of a comprehensive sign guideline
for consistency between business signs.
7. Although the existing wall sign is legally nonconforming, the applicant is encouraged to reface or replace it
to meet current guidelines.
8. Although the freestanding sign is legally nonconforming, the applicant is encouraged to reface the cabinet
sign with appropriate panels that meet the current EC guidelines and eliminate the plywood panels, or
replace the freestanding pole sign with an externally -lit freestanding monument sign. The applicant is also
encouraged to expand the planting area in this corner of the site. Revise the landscape plan on C5
Lighting and Landscape Plan to show that the existing freestanding sign will not be moved, and change
the description of the sign from "Monument Sign" to "Pole Sign" on the plan.
9. Revise Sheet A1.0 Building Plan and Elevations to indicate that the blue trim in the gable and cupola will
be painted white.
10. Revise the southeast elevation to include a double window in the front third of the wall.
11. Revise the drawings to show where the laundry vents will be relocated. The vents and all equipment shall
not be visible from the EC.
12. The materials and colors as submitted are approved.
Please provide:
1. Two full sets of revised drawings addressing each of these conditions. Include updated ARB revision
dates on each drawing and an ARB approval signature panel.
2. A memo including detailed responses indicating how each condition has been satisfied. If changes
other than those requested have been made, also identify those changes in the memo. Highlighting
the changes in the drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval.
3. The attached "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.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Eryn Brennan
Senior Planner
Planning Division
Cc: Robert B. Anderson, AIA
172 South Pantop Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22911
Hydraulic Wash LLC
1560 Robin Lane
Charlottesville, Va 22911
File
SDP -2008-00142 Hydraulic `' " sh Major Amendment
Elizabeth Marotta
From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [Joel.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 10:22 AM
To: Elizabeth Marotta
Cc: Amy Pflaum
Subject: SDP -2008-00142 Hydraulic Wash Major Amendment
SDP -2008-00142 Hydraulic Wash Major Amendment
Elizabeth,
Page 1 of 1
I have reviewed the above site plan and all VDOT comments have been adequately addressed. Please let the
applicant know that a permit will be required for any work within the VDOt ROW.
Thanks,
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Staff Engineer
434-293-0011 Ext. 120
joel.denunzio@vdot.virginia.gov
12/3/2008
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4012
January 6, 2009
Justin Shimp
Dominion Development Resources, LLC
172 South Pantops Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22911
RE: ARB -2008-138: Hydraulic Wash
Tax Map 61K, Parcel 5-1A
Dear Mr. Shimp:
I have reviewed your revised submittal for the above -referenced project which consisted of:
Drawings:
Site Plan Sheets C-1 through C-6, latest revision 12/17/08.
Sheet A1.0 Building Plans, Elevation ce Section, latest revision 12/17/08.
The revisions included in this latest submission address all outstanding conditions of ARB approval. You may consider
this letter your Certificate of Appropriateness.
This approval is predicated on the fact that the design and materials, as proposed and exhibited for review, will be used.
This application is approved with the condition that mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the Entrance
Corridor. The acceptance of approval implies that the applicant has agreed to execute the design as indicated on the site
plan, attachments, materials, samples, and other submittal items presented. Any change in the approved design or
materials will require an amendment to the plan and must be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Board.
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING:
1. This approval does not include any window signs. If window signs are proposed, a separate application must be
made, reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Board.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Eryn Brennan
Senior Planner
cc: ARB File
Elizabeth Marotta, Senior Planner (via email)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434)296-5832
October 12, 2010
Robert Anderson
Dominion Engineering & Design, LLC
172 S. Pantops Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22911
RE: ARB -2010-114: Hydraulic Wash
Dear Mr. Anderson,
Fax(434)972-4126
1 have reviewed your revised submittal for the above -noted application (Sheet C5, dated 12117/08, and Sheet A I, dated
12!30!08) for a county -wide Certificate of Appropriateness for a Minor Amendment. With these revisions your proposal meets
all of the design criteria outlined by the Architectural Review Board for this type of Certificate. You may consider this letter
Your Certificate of Appropriateness.
This approval is predicated on the fact that the design and materials, as proposed for review, will he used. The acceptance of
approval implies that the applicant has agreed to execute the design as indicated on the site plan, attachments, materials,
samples, and other submittal items presented. Any change in the approved design or materials will require an amendment to
the plan and a new application.
Please note the following:
This application is approved with the condition that mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the Entrance Corridor
and that the two garage doors shown on the southeast elevation will be painted to match the brick.
Changes made to the site or architectural plans after issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness can delay the signing of
mylars and the approval of building permits. It is in the applicant's best interest to notify ARB staff of such changes and to
initiate the review of amendments to ARB -approved plans to avoid fixture delays.
Certificates of Appropriateness are valid for the same period that the corresponding site plan is valid. If there is no site plan
required for the proposed work, the Certificate of Appropriateness is valid for 3 years. Applicants requesting an extension
of the period of validity must do so in writing. The letter must be received by the Director of Planning prior to the
expiration date.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me at (434) 296-5832 x 3029.
ricerely,
Eryn Brennan
Senior Planner
cc: ARB File
Elizabeth Marotta
From:
John Paul Diez
Sent:
Friday, October 29, 2010 2:38 PM
To:
Elizabeth Marotta
Subject:
Hydraulic Wash - LOR
Elizabeth,
I've looked over the plans and engineering has no comments. The total amount of post -development impervious is less
than the pre -development, so
no stormwater detention is necessary. In addition, no erosion and sediment control plan is necessary since the area of
disturbance is less than 10,000 sf.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
John Diez
Engineering Technician
Dept. of Community Development
(434) 296-5832 Ext. 3025
Elizabeth Marotta
From: Elizabeth Marotta
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 9:53 AM
To: 'mmyers@ddrva.com'
Subject: Hydraulic LOR#1 Planning Comments
Mike,
As discussed on the phone, I have a few comments to pass along. Inspections and Engineering has yet to weigh in, so I
would recommend holding off on resubmitting until you have their comments/approval.
Planning comments are as follows:
1. With regard to the 1 parking space being added: since this encroaches on the parking setback even more, please
add a note that this is an existing nonconforming space (if it is), similar to the parking space on the south side of
the lot. Related to this, does the demo plan need to be amended to reflect additional demo to accommodate
the new curb and parking?
2. Lighting plan must be updated to reflect revised site plan and relocated light. I noticed that the lighting plan
seems to show the edge of parking way closer to the property line than the site plan. please make sure the
lighting plan is accurate.
3. Related to the lighting change: all fixtures are required to be full cutoff fixtures, so what is the special meaning
of the note that the relocated fixture shall be cutoff? If this is referring to a special shield or devise to reduce
light to the south (as seems to be indicated in your letter), please clarify (and provide specifications).
4. Callout for shrubs on south side of site the conflicts with another callout. Please revise so legible.
S. Engineering and Inspections approval is required; comments are pending.
Elizabeth M. Marotta
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle Community Development Department
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434) 296-5832 Ext. 3432
Elizabeth Marotta
From: Elizabeth Marotta
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 9:13 AM
To: 'mmyers@ddrva.com'
Subject: Hyd wash- Inspections comments
Mike,
Below are Inspections comments for Hydraulic Wash LOR.
Based on plans revised October 27, 2010.
Re -locate the accessibility curb cut so that the sidewalk immediately in front of the entrance door is not ramped or
sloped. There must be a 5' deep (from front to back) level surface in front of the entrance door so that a wheelchair will
not roll backwards while the operator is trying to open the door.
As noted during the major amendment review, any portion of the south wall of the proposed office addition that is
within 10' of the property line must be of fire -rated construction.
Elizabeth M. Marotta
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle Community Development Department
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434) 296-5832 Ext. 3432