The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP200900078 Review Comments 2009-09-25n.n.n.a.Louts LBEMARLE FLWANNA NELSON Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District 706 Forest St, Ste G Charlottesville, VA 22903 975 -022 September 25, 2009 TO:Summer Frederick Planning Departm nt RE:Soils Report and Comments for: CTS Operation Center twit T 7 W w a s wD - r 7 A if,%4:41 7, .1.- ,, 7, - ' li'* s 4i cam rry , " " rg " 'p 4,24,,,,e.„,-,,..,0.,4•,„. , z ?' a ` . {' i-litto,./-,,,,,„.:ii:. ,---,:#4,_:.-, A ir: ... s.„ jx ikt S F'X14 5':n! 4 2 Rte.4 S k 4 vi- V Y 7C. x x y is C P i i a ,...,:---,',5";,' a t ' T , hr 4 L r f t i a ^ s x r • r `. ., t ' , r x, a.3r fi i.« .6i a . S.a; w ss xr pi E x 1 t n.. k4 r rP`k !.fi • `,a 1 115 x ` ' i "1 ` - a 1 ^ a. ^fir s t . 7k U 7 3 t m j .z°f 3 P e* d r,4,4*Wes. VieAiti ti 72D3 i a a' ayg l / r yy»y.. 12D sMJ 11, d' , n 71B 88 w L4 , "! ;,l a 1,1,,L,71 ic , 3 ffi 88 72D3 4, $Ira d 12 anitonu 7 01 mo^i'", F 716 236 }J 00411, I2C 72C3 4:ti i 90B**' b '"'11B r a x' s 72D32 7ID 12 i y 72C3 71 Ar 4/10(s4404,41,* ' '' N. M A 25 th 71C r/ 72C3 79B 72C. i.58E 58C lititint72Eet58E58D 79B This soil survey map was compiled by the U.S,c .1''' 'Department of Agriculture, Soil ConservationService, and cooperating agencies. Basemapsareorthophotographspreparedby City of`Charlottesv 777 8 N 4 ..,-. 76M2 =01 -A T + tti a a "s x r v jF t1 1V2. ,,;1"..4 4 A. deekl 44 , e K ///'/ Iiiikil;_ zillwalstsWriiiivi411/ 1L9.4700kw0611* kf) 3:::-4 %.,-.. zttnrw I. lit R ®Wl. •‘.4,11114110,1° 16 B i 14 1 1115 76M2 K l ''';''''' i**/ L ;; Att '' sql. Ir4°''''' U 2,7 N x 11 \\ 7 7 i kkof J 77a 7O / vaziacierag E, 7j1 7 " l 42.70°‘ r 9,,,, A rm h mh 0*, fir Part 1 i 2 t .0/ 19-r i I ”7 R D ' i 11 yyY N 1j.E E„n 7 F ' 10x8 W • ^ 7JC 53 j Q . A I ) 1 77 j m 2Sq A$ by q 7. 2 l 0 ! . 7 0R -2 t,.. ti : 77E1 -01 = -1 f 91 - 29ijai 91 -2 0 I.-i; 77E1 - 01 - A Albemarle Count Tax Ma Scale 077E1 Part 10260520780Y 441'\''''8.Feet sue ,...'_ .. _ 61.- Note This map is for display purposes only 4:1• and shows parcels as of 12/31/2008.Avon Street Extc,See Map Book Introduction for additional details. 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: CTS Operations Center Soil Survey Area: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Unit: 12D Catoctin silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Catoctin is a moderately steep to steep, moderately deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is silt loam about 5 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderately rapid. 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 4e. The Virginia soil management group is JJ. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 13E Catoctin very stony silt loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Catoctin is a steep, moderately deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is silt loam about 5 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderately rapid. 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: 71B Rabun clay loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Rabun is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay 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 2e. The Virginia soil management group is N. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 71C Rabun clay loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Rabun is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay 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 6e. The Virginia soil management group is N. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 71D Rabun clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Rabun is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay 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 6e. The Virginia soil management group is N. This soil is not hydric. Thomas Jefferson SWCD 1 9/25/09 Map Unit: 72C3 Rabun clay, 7 to 15 percent slopes, severely eroded Description Category: Virginia FOTG Rabun is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay about 4 inches thick. The surface layer has a very 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 N. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 72D3 Rabun clay, 15 to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Description Category: Virginia FOTG Rabun is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay about 4 inches thick. The surface layer has a very 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 6e. The Virginia soil management group is N. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 77 Riverview - Chewacla complex Description Category: Virginia FOTG Riverview is a nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 12 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is occasionally flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 48 inches. The land capability classification is 2w. The Virginia soil management group is G. This soil is not hydric. Chewacla is a nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, somewhat poorly drained soil. Typically the surface layer is silt loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is occasionally flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 12 inches. The land capability classification is 3w. The Virginia soil management group is I. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 83 Toccoa fine sandy loam Description Category: Virginia FOTG Toccoa is a nearly level to gently sloping, very deep, moderately well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is fine sandy loam about 9 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderately rapid. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is occasionally flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 45 inches. The land capability classification is 2w. The Virginia soil management group is 1I. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 88 Udorthents, loamy Description Category: Virginia FOTG No description available for Udorthents, loamy. Small Commercial Buildings - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Thomas Jetterson SWCD 2 9/25/09 Symbol Soil Name Rating 12D Catoctin silt loam, 15 to 25 Very limited percent slopes 13E Catoctin very stony silt Very limited loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes 71B Rabun clay loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited percent slopes 71C Rabun clay loam, 7 to 15 Very limited percent slopes 71 D Rabun clay loam, 15 to 25 Very limited percent slopes 72C3 Rabun clay, 7 to 15 Very limited percent slopes, severely eroded 72D3 Rabun clay, 15 to 25 Very limited percent slopes, severely eroded 77 Riverview - Chewacla Very limited complex 83 Toccoa fine sandy loam Very limited 88 Udorthents, loamy Not Rated 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 12D Catoctin silt loam, 15 to 25 Not hydric percent slopes 13E Catoctin very stony silt Not hydric loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes 71B Rabun clay loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric percent slopes 71C Rabun clay loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 71 D Rabun clay loam, 15 to 25 Not hydric percent slopes 72C3 Rabun clay, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes, severely eroded 72D3 Rabun clay, 15 to 25 Not hydric percent slopes, severely eroded 77 Riverview - Chewacla Partially hydric complex 83 Toccoa fine sandy loam Partially hydric 88 Udorthents, loamy Partially hydric Thomas Jefferson SWCD 3 9/25/09 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 12D Catoctin silt loam, 15 to 25 1.5 percent slopes 13E Catoctin very stony silt 1.5 loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes 71B Rabun clay loam, 2 to 7 1.5 percent slopes 71C Rabun clay loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 71D Rabun clay loam, 15 to 25 1.5 percent slopes 72C3 Rabun clay, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes, severely eroded 72D3 Rabun clay, 15 to 25 1.5 percent slopes, severely eroded 77 Riverview - Chewacla 1.5 complex 83 Toccoa fine sandy loam 1.5 88 Udorthents, loamy 0 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 12D Catoctin silt loam, 15 to 25 Moderate percent slopes 13E Catoctin very stony silt Moderate loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes 71B Rabun clay loam, 2 to 7 Moderate percent slopes 71C Rabun clay loam, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes 71 D Rabun clay loam, 15 to 25 Moderate percent slopes 72C3 Rabun clay, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes, severely Thomas Jefferson SWCD 4 9/25/09 eroded 72D3 Rabun clay, 15 to 25 Moderate percent slopes, severely eroded 77 Riverview - Chewacla Moderate complex 83 Toccoa fine sandy loam Moderate 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 12D Catoctin silt loam, 15 to 25 High percent slopes 13E Catoctin very stony silt High loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes 7I B Rabun clay loam, 2 to 7 High percent slopes 71C Rabun clay loam, 7 to 15 High percent slopes 71D Rabun clay loam, 15 to 25 High percent slopes 72C3 Rabun clay, 7 to 15 High percent slopes, severely eroded 72D3 Rabun clay, 15 to 25 High percent slopes, severely eroded 77 Riverview - Chewacla Low complex 83 Toccoa fine sandy loam Low Thomas Jetterson SWCD 5 9/25/09 lh OF ALRLr 8 COV. IRGIN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 October 6, 2009 To: Justin Walton; VMDO via email: walton@L vmdo.com CC: Scott Hendrix; City of Charlottesville via email: Hendrix@charlottesville.org RE: SDP2009 -78 CTS - Major 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 (Engineer) Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner) Albemarle County Division of Planning (E911) Albemarle County Division of Planning (Architectural Review Board) Albemarle County Division of Planning (Historic Preservation) Albemarle County Division of Planning (Water Protection) Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue Albemarle County Service Authority Virginia Department of Health Virginia Department of Transportation 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 October 19, 2009. Failure to submit this information 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. Sincerely, Summer Frederick Senior Planner Zoning & Current Development r IRGINN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 Project:SDP -2009- 00078, City of Charlottesville CTS Operations Center Plan preparer:Mr. Justin Walton, VMDO Architects Owner or rep.:Mr. Scott Hendrix; City of Charlottesville Date received:14 September 2009 Date of Comment: 5 October 2009 Engineer:Phil Custer The major site plan amendment for the City of Charlottesville CTS Operations Center, received on 14 September 2009, has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development can recommend approval to the plan after the following comments have been addressed. 1. The storm sewer line from structure 4 -1 to 4 -4 must be included in the phase A. 2. The underground cistern must be included in phase A. 3. If the biofilter south of Building A is to be included in Phase A, please include the storm sewer from structures 2 -1 to 4 -4 in Phase A as well. From the perspective of engineering review, I do not see any need for this biofilter to be included in Phase A. To simplify the phasing, I recommend that the phase line be moved closer to building A. 4. Please remove all ESC and Stormwater management sheets from this set. The addition of phase lines for Zoning purposes will not affect the WPO plans. If substantial deviations from either the Stormwater or Erosion Control Plans are required at this time, please submit a separate WPO application and appropriate fees for amendments to those plans. The changes to the plan as currently listed (modifications to utility lines and the addition of zoning phase lines) will not require a WPO plan amendment. Application #:SDP200900078 Short Review Comr.. nts Project Name: CTS Operations Center - Major 1 Minor Amendment Date Completed:09/28/2009 Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: I OBJECTION. Date Completed:10/06/2009 Reviewer:James Barber Fire Rescue Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: -Must comply with the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Date Completed:10/02/2009 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer Inspections Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Based on plans revised September 14, 2009. Assuming that Phase 1A will precede Phase 1 B, this office has no comments or conditions. Date Completed:10/05/2009 Reviewer:Summer Frederick CommDev- Current Development Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: I No Objection Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 Service Auth‘rity s TO: Summer Frederick FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer DATE: September 30, 1009 RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: CTS Operations Center SDP200900078 TM 77E1 -1 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 2. An inch water line is located approximately distant. 3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is Gpm + at 20 psi residual. 4. An inch sewer line is located approximately 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. A/E Response: Acknowledged. No improvements have been placed with ACSA easements as a part of this FSP Major Amendment. 7.and plans are currently under review. 8.and plans have been received and approved. 9. No plans are required. X 10. Final water plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative approval. A/E Response: No revisions have been made effecting ACSA serviced lines. The reviewer has expressed no further concerns per the attached e- mail. 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: Have the applicant submit three sets of water plans and profile directly to the ACSA for review. The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows: meter locations water line size waterline locations sewer line size 168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698 www.serviceauthoriy.org Service Auth6rty 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 o IRC;tN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 October 19, 2009 Response Memo for Final Site Development Plan: Major Amendment One Project:SDP -2009- 00078, City of Charlottesville CTS Operations Center Plan preparer:Mr. Justin Walton, VMDO Architects Owner or rep.:Mr. Scott Hendrix; City of Charlottesville Date received:14 September 2009 Date of Comment: 5 October 2009 Engineer:Phil Custer The major site plan amendment for the City of Charlottesville CTS Operations Center, received on 14 September 2009, has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development can recommend approval to the plan after the following comments have been addressed. 1. The storm sewer line from structure 4 -1 to 4 -4 must be included in the phase A. A/E Response: Per our meeting on 10.08.09, a note has been added so sheet S -9 stating that storm sewer profile 4 will be completed as a part of Phase 1A. 2. The underground cistern must be included in phase A. A/E Response: Per our meeting on 10.08.09, a note has been added so sheet S -9 stating that the rainwater (underground) cistern will be installed as a part of Phase 1A. 3. If the biofilter south of Building A is to be included in Phase A, please include the storm sewer from structures 2 -1 to 4 -4 in Phase A as well. From the perspective of engineering review, I do not see any need for this biofilter to be included in Phase A. To simplify the phasing, I recommend that the phase line be moved closer to building A. A/E Response: Per our meeting on 10.08.09, a note has been added so sheet S -9 stating that storm sewer profile 2 will be completed as a part of Phase 1A. It was agreed by all parties that the phase line did not need to be moved as suggested above and so the line has been left as originally submitted. 4. Please remove all ESC and Stormwater management sheets from this set. The addition of phase lines for Zoning purposes will not affect the WPO plans. If substantial deviations from either the Stormwater or Erosion Control Plans are required at this time, please submit a separate WPO application and appropriate fees for amendments to those plans. The changes to the plan as currently listed (modifications to utility lines and the addition of zoning phase lines) will not require a WPO plan amendment. A/E Response: Per our meeting on 10.08.09, we agreed to eliminate the ESC and Stormwater Management (SWIM) sheets from our amendment submission. These have been removed. Application #: ;SDP200900078 Short Review Comr nts Project Name: CTS Operations Center - Major LMinor Amendment Date Completed:09/28/2009 Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: NO OBJECTION. Date Completed:10/06/2009 Reviewer:James Barber Fire Rescue Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Must comply with the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Date Completed:10/02/2009 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer Inspections Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Based on plans revised September 14, 2009. Assuming that Phase 1A will precede Phase 1B, this office has no comments or conditions. Date Completed:11/03/2009 Reviewer:Philip Custer Engineer Z &CD Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: No Objection Date Completed:10/05/2009 Reviewer:Summer Frederick CommDev- Current Development Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: No Objection Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Tuesday, November 03, 2009