HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600014 Review Comments 2016-07-22Short Review Comments Report for:
SDP201600014
SubApplication Type:
Wildrock - Final
Final Plat
Date Completed:03/21/2016
Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer Inspections
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated March 14, 2016.
No comments or conditions.
Division:
Date Completed:04/06/2016
Reviewer:John Anderson Engineering
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:1. Copy Legend from C2 to C3.
2. Label existing contours, C2.
3. Label handicapped parking space/aisle width.
4. Provide site access ditch (W’ × D’) dimensions.
5. Show/label stream buffer for south fork stream: C2, C3, C5 (ref. GIS).
6. Show portion of stream buffer near relocated entrance along front, eastern edge of property.
7. Revise gravel access road and entrance typical sections (C7) to show a minimum of four (4)
feet from the edge of the shoulder to the ditch centerline [14-412.A.2.(a.)]. Also, #4, above.
8. Final Site Plan approval requires an Approved VSMP. Please submit VSMP Application.
9. Note: Remaining SDP201500053 Initial Site Plan comments addressed.
Division:
Date Completed:04/06/2016
Reviewer:Christopher Perez CD
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:03/17/2016
Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911
Review Status:Approved
Reviews Comments:Approved.
Division:
Date Completed:03/20/2016
Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 3/14/16.
No comments or objections.
Division:
Date Completed:04/01/2016
Reviewer:Josh Kirtley Health Department
Review Status:Approved
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:04/11/2016
Reviewer:Joel DeNunzio VDOT
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Page:1 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:November 02, 2016
Date Completed:05/02/2016
Reviewer:Christopher Perez Planner Z&CD
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:05/12/2016
Reviewer:Joel DeNunzio VDOT
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:04/21/2016
Reviewer:John Anderson Engineering
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Revise gravel access road and entrance typical sections (C7) to show a minimum of four (4) feet
from the edge of the shoulder to the ditch centerline [14-412.A.2.(a.)]. (Rev. 1) Not Addressed.
Applicant 15-Apr 2016 comment response states “typical road section detail for the gravel access
road is dimensioned and labeled as requested. See details 3 and 4 on sheet C7.” It is unclear why
the left ditch (detail, sheet C7) provides less than 4’ minimum from the edge of the shoulder to the
ditch centerline, while the right ditch does. Please revise.
All other prior engineering review comments addressed.
janderson2 4/21/2016 3:08 AM
Division:
Date Completed:05/15/2016
Reviewer:John Anderson Engineering
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:GWA/Groundwater Management Plan, Draft, 29-Apr 2016
1. Provide professional seal with Final Report (if possible; sealed is preferable to signed-only
report).
2. Delete reference to rain garden, p. 1 and next to last p. of report.
3. Recommend number report pages. (Hand-lettering is fine.)
4. Note: Engineering accepts anticipated site withdrawal is 0.2% (±) estimated recharge rate
(excluding drain field recharge). Engineering further accepts that “the proposed use as a day camp
with primitive campsites and education center” should not imperil on-site availability of groundwater.
Tier 3 GWA establishes that parcel plus up-gradient forested acreage off-parcel to the north (735 Ac.)
may provide 360,885 GPD due to favorable subsurface formations. Report states “Successful water
wells have both a reliable source of recharge (in this setting, colluvial material), and an open network
of bedrock fractures that connect with the recharge source. TMP6-26B has both of these
ingredients.” Compare .36 MGD (average) recharge rate with 765 GPD predicted maximum daily
groundwater withdrawal. “These numbers indicated that the proposed use of groundwater is
negligible relative to the abundance of groundwater that naturally occurs on the parcel.” Engineering
accepts report values and conclusions.
5. Report states “A 60+ gallon per minute well has recently been drilled on the parcel.” Please
provide copy of this (exploratory) well test report.
Division:
Date Completed:05/27/2016
Reviewer:Matthew Wentland Engineering
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:06/16/2016
Reviewer:John Anderson Engineering
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:All prior engineering review comments addressed
janderson2 6/16/2016 3:43 AM
Division:
Page:2 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:November 02, 2016
Date Completed:07/01/2016
Reviewer:Justin Deel VDOT
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:06/29/2016
Reviewer:Christopher Perez CD
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:6-29-16 All planning items are addressed. Pending review/approval from VDOT (including a
determination from VDOT if off site sight distance easments are required). CPP
Division:
Date Completed:08/25/2016
Reviewer:Justin Deel VDOT
Review Status:Approved
Reviews Comments:7-27-16 Sent two copies of all copies to Justin Deel for his review.
Division:
Date Completed:09/07/2016
Reviewer:Christopher Perez CD
Review Status:Approved
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Page:3 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:November 02, 2016
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
sHimpCIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
July 22, 2016
Mr. Justin Deel, E.I.T.
Land Development Engineer
VDOT
Regarding: Wildrock Day Camp—SDP-2016-00014
Intersection Sight Distance Waiver Request
Dear Mr. Deel,
We request a design waiver for the Intersection Sight Distance for the Wildrock entrance on State
Route 810 for the following reasons. Please refer to the attached speed study for justification of the proposed
changes.
1. Rte. 810(Blackwell's Hollow Road) has an unmarked speed limit. A speed study was completed on
July 18 that suggested a design speed of 40 mph for this stretch of road. 40 mph is a more appropriate
design speed for Rte. 810 than the standard 55 mph typically suggested for unmarked roads because
road conditions (vertical and horizontal curves and the lack of a shoulder)cause drivers to limit their
speed of their own accord.According to VDOT Road Design Manual Appendix F Table 2-5, the
intersection sight distance for a two-lane, 40 mph road is 445 feet. This sight distance is easily met with
the current entrance design. Both left and right sight distance lines are within the 15' prescriptive
easement and are not obscured by topography or landscaping.
2. The entrance design is further supported by the existence of the entrance to the Patricia Ann Byrom
Park that is 53 linear feet from the proposed entrance. This entrance received VDOT approval and
serves a similar use.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me via e-mail at keane@shimp-engineering.com or Justin
Shimp at Justin anshimp-engineering.com or by telephone at 434-227-5140.
Sincerely,
Keane Rucker, E.I.T.
Shimp Engineering
S OF A..Lk4
i.
els
�jR(;i1�P
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville,VA, 22902
Phone 434-296-5832 Fax 434-972-4126
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp(Justin@chimp-engineering.com)
From: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: June 29,2016
Subject: SDP201600014 Wildrock—Final Site Plan
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments 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,which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
Conditions of Initial Plan Approval:
1. [Comments The public notification fee of$200 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Please pay the fee
prior to any further review/action of the plan. Final: Comment addressed.
2. 1SP2014-15 Conditions of Approvals On the plan depict the limits of the overnight tent camp site area.
Also provide a note on the plan that states: "The focility is limited to six (6) overnight camp sites pursuant to
.SP2014-15. "Final: Comment addressed.
3. [32.7.2.1] Vehicular Access to Site. Each entrance onto any public street shall be designed and constructed
as required by the standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. VDOT approval of the proposed
entrance to the site shall be required prior to final site plan approval.Rev 2. Comment still relevant.
Pending review/approval from VDOT(including a determination from VDOT if off site sight distance
easement(s)are required).
4. 132.7.2.2(A), 14-412(8)1 Streets and 'Li•arelrt-a s composing internal rot /network. The County Lngineer
has provided guidance on how to modify the proposal in the attached comments. Please revise the plan
accordingly.
Submit the required variation request under Section 32.3.5(b) for staff review. This item shall he acted on
prior to final site plan approval. If the variation is approved provide the following note on the plan: "The 14
nun travel 'av nth ,i foot shoulders was approved through a variation request under Section 32.3.5(h)
which allows fOr variation to the mininmrn staatdards provide/itu Section 32 7.2.2(a) and the design
standards fOr private streets in Chapter 14. -Final: On the cover sheet provide the above note. Rev 1.
Comment addressed. Also revise the tv Acal for the new °ravel access road to rovide a minimum of
four 4 feel from the ed_e of the shoulder to the ditch centerline. Rev 2: Comment addressed.
5. 14.12.15(a)J Strrlacc material. The agent, in consultation with the County Engineer, has approved the use of
,ravel throughout the site. Provide the following note on the plan: "Grupcipurkihg and access aisles have
been permitted for the site pursuant to section 32.3.5 Variations ca /esc options, tiluch allow modification
(4'32.7.3 Onsite parking, which is designed and constructed as provided in section 4.12. "Final: Comment
addressed.
6. 14.12.15(g)] Curb and gutter in parking areas and along 1/'ave/ways. The agent, in consultation with the
County Engineer, has determined that curb and gutter shall not be required for the site as the modification
would equally or better serve the public health, safety or welfare. Provide the following note on the plan:
'Curb and gutter shall not be required for the site pursuant to section 32.3.5 Variations and exceptions,
which allow modification of 32.7.3 atriic parking, which is designed and constructed as provided in section
4.12. " Final: Comment addressed.
7. (32.7.5.11 IVater Supply and Sewage System. Al] private water and sewer the shall be designed and
constructed to the standards of the Virginia Department of Health. Health Director approval is required prior
to final site plan approval. The water supply shall also satisfy the requirements of section 32.7.6(h)to
provide fire protection. Final: Comment addressed.
8. 132.5.1(c)j Dimensioay. On the plan dimension all proposed improvements. Final: Comment addressed.
9. (32.5.1(c),32.5.2(n)J Dimensions. On the plan dimension the existing barn,to include its height. Final:
Comment addressed.
10. 132.5.2(n)1 Evisting and proposed improvements. Dimension all driveways, paths, access-ways, and
sidewalk. Final: Comment addressed.
11. 132.5.2(b)] Information regarding the proposed use. On the plan list the maximum amount of impervious
cover on the site. Final: Comment not addressed. On the cover sheet provide this information.
Rev 1. Comment addressed.
12. 132.5.2(b)1 Jut mullion regarding the proposed use. On the plan provide the maximum amount of paved
parking and other vehicular circulation areas, including the gravel parking/drive aisle areas. Final:
Comment not addressed. On the cover sheet provide this information. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
13. (32.5.2(b)( Information regarding the proposed use. On the cover sheet remove the gross residential density
for the site, as this information is not applicable to this development. Final: Comment addressed.
14„132.5.2(b)] hOrmation regarding the proposed use. On the plan provide the square footage of recreation
areas. Final: Comment not addressed but the purpose of this request is met through site plan.
15. (32.5.2(n)( Evisting and proposed improvements.. ()n the plan dimension the trash container. Final:
Comment addressed.
16. 132.5.2(n),4.12.191 Evisting and proposed improvements. Dumpster pads are to be concrete and shall
extend beyond the front ()leach dumpster so that the front wheels of a truck servicing the dumpster will rest
on the concrete, but in no case shall the length of a concrete pad be less than eight (8) feet beyond the front
of the dumpster. Screening of the dumpster will be required per Section 32.7.9.7. Revise plan to assure the
above requirements are met. Final: Comment addressed. Dumpster is arc not proposed; rather,
oarba e cans are ro osed.
_
17. 132.5.2(n)] Existing and proposed improvonacras. Clearly depict and label limits of disturbance and show
areas us here existing VeQctation will he removed. Final: Comment addressed.
18. 132.5.2(n)1 Existing and proposed improvcments. Dimension the existing and proposed fencing on the plan.
Final: Comment addressed.
2
e r
19. 132.5.2(n)1 Existing aiui proposed iiuprovenlents. Dimension the lull width of the retaining walls required
for construction. Final: Comment addressed.
20. 132.5.2(n),4.12.16(e)1 Bumper block.;. Bumper blocks shall be provided for all of the onsite parking spaces.
Bumper blocks,shall be constructed of a durable material such as concrete or treated timbers. Each himnper
block shall be a rnininlurn length of six (6)Leet, a rnaXlrnlrrn height crf,lire (5) inches, cord,hall he securely=
anchored into the pavement in at least two (2)places. Revise the plan accordingly. Final: Comment not
addressed. Provide cutsheet for the bumper blocks with dimensions. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
21. 132.5.2(1)1 Evisting and proposed utilities. On the plan depict all existing and proposed utilities to the site,
specifically electric. Final: Comment addressed.
22. 132.5.2(1)1 Evisting and proposed utilities. Indicate deed book and page reference as well as ownership and
width of existing utility easements. Final: Comment addressed.
23. 132.5.2(01 117utercourses and other bodies of water. On the plan label the water feature at the front of the
property "Buck Mountain Creek". Also, label the stream feature that bisects the property. Final: Comment
addressed.
24. 132.5.2(1)1 Watercourses and other bodies of water. Depict and label the limits of Water Protection
Ordinance 13uffer on the properly for all applicable features. Final: Comment not adequately addressed.
There is a 100' buffer along the entire frontage of the site. Accurately depict this buffer on the plan.
Please work with Engineering if you have questions about this buffer. Rev 1. Comment. addressed.
25. 132.5.2(g)1 Onsite sewage systema setback line_;. On sheet C,'4 provide the setback distance of the proposed
septic field from the adjacent stream. Final: Comment addressed. Health Department approval
received.
26. 'Comment] On Sheet C5 there is a stream crossing one of the proposed primitive trails. If a pedestrian
stream crossing is proposed in this location, depict and label it on the plans. If not, please specify how hikers
will cross the stream. Final: Comment addressed.
27. 132.5.2(0 1 il'crtercourscs and caber bodies of water_ On sheet I revise the watershed note as follows: "This
site lies within the Buck if-lountain Creek Watershed which is in the South fork Rivarrna Reservoir Water
,Supply 1t%citershed. " Final: Comment addressed.
28. 1Commentj The `sheet index' on the cover page lists C6 — site details; however, that sheet is not provided
in the plan set. l ither provide the sheet or remove it from the cover sheet. Final: Comment addressed.
29. 132.5.2(n)1 Outdoor lighting. Any proposed outdoor lighting must be shown on the site plan. A photometric
plan and lighting cut sheets must be provided with the final site plan. Proposed lighting must comply with
requirements of Sec. 4.17 oldie Zoning Ordinance. Final: Comment artiall , addressed. At a minimum
provide photometric plan to the adjacent residential property- line (TMP 6-28A) to assure spillover is
within County regulations of one-half(1/2) foot candle. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
Also, provide the following standard lighting note on the lighting plan:Each outdoor luminaire
equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall he a full cutoff luminaire and shall he
arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoinrna residential districts and awal from adjacent
roads. The,spillover of lighting from luminaires sotto public roads and property in residential or rural
areas zoning districts shall not exceed one-half foot-candle. Rev I. Comment addressed.
30. 132.6.2(j)1 Landscape!plan. A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 is required with the final site
plan. Final: Comment addressed.
3
31. 132.7.9.4(1)1 Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials in order to satistY the
landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9, subject to the agent's approN,al. If you intend to
use existing trees to satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the following:
I. Areas and otherjeatnres.s'hown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall show the trees to be
preserved, the limits of clearing, the location andlype of protective fencinoi, grade changes requiring
tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing.
Final: Comment not adequately addressed. Provide the above required information on the
plan, specifically the location and type of protective fencing. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to
ensure that the specified trees will he protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly
approved by the agent in a particular case, the checklist shall conform to the specifications in the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages 111-393 through III-413. and as hereafter
amended. Final: Comment still relevant. Assure the conservation checklist is signed. Rev 1.
Comment addressed.
32. 132.7.9.4(c)! Existing landscape JCatares. On the landscape plan identify whether existing wooded areas are
evergreen, deciduous, or a mix thereof. Final: Comment addressed.
33. 132.7.9.61 Landscaping within a parking area. An arca of at least live percent of the parking and vehicular
circulation area shall be landscaped with trees or shrubs with at least one large or medium shade tree per ten
parking spaces or portion thereof. Provide calculations to show this requirement has been met with the final
site plan. Final: Comment addressed.
34. 132.7.9.71 Screening. On the landscape plan provide the proper screening for the commercial use which is
adjacent to niral areas zoning district. Also, provide the parking areas the required screening from adjacent
residential and rural areas districts, and that provide the refuse area the required screening. Final: Comment
not adequately addressed. On the landscape plan replace the screening shrubs with 4' —6' tall
evergreen screening trees. Plant materials shall consist of a double staggered row of evergreen trees
planted fifteen (15)feet on center. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
Also, along this same property line the existing vegetation being utilized as screening is inaccurately
depicted on the plans. The deciduous wooded areas are not located within the fence nor within 10 feet
of the fence. Revise the landscape plan to accurately depict the existing tree line and assure the
plantings arc located on the site. If they are located on the neiolthor's property continue the evergreen
tree line to the front property line. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
35. 132.7.9.51 Street Trees. Street trees are required along all existing streets; provide trees on the Blackwells
Hollow Road frontage, Final: Comment partially addressed. On the landscape plan depict sight
distance lines for the entrance of the site. Relocate all street trees outside of the sight distance for the
site. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
36. 132.7.9.81 Tree canopy. The minimum required tree canopy for thesite is ten percent. It appears the majority
or the tree canopy requirement will be met with existing trees. Provide calculations on the final site plan to
show this requirement has been met. Final: Comment addressed.
37. 132.5.4, 17-403, 17-10031 Groundwotcr Tii' Assessment. This is a non-residential site plan riot served by
public water. As such, it requires a Groundwater Assessment. If water usage will be less than 2,000
gallons/day on average, a Tier III review will need to be conducted and submitted to the County with the
corresponding S548 fee. If the water usage is above 2.000 gallons/day, a Tier IV review will need to he
conducted and submitted to the County with the corresponding S I,I 83 fee, The applicable Groundwater
1.ssessment is required prior to approval of the final site plan. Rev 2: Comment addressed.
4
•
Additional comments on the final site plan:
38. [Comment" Final site plan approval requires VSMP Application review and approval. Please work with
l' ilgineering to process this request. Rev 2: Comment addressed.
39. [Comment] On the cover sheet, under the title provide the SDP#: -SDP2016-14-. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
40. [32.6.2(h)] Signature panel. Update the required signature panel to include the health Department.
Rev 1. Comment addressed.
41. [Comment! To avoid confusion revise the parking schedule to omit the parking calculation of-1 space per
campsite-and merely reference -28 spaces provided per condition #1 of SP2014-151 Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
42. [Comment] Fencing nearest to the Buck Mountain Creek listed on sheet C2 to be removed-does not
match fencing depicted on sheet C4 to remain". Correct labeling throughout plan. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
43. [Comment] The gravel driveway and entrance being removed is depicted throughout the plans as
remaining. Correct this by completely removing the feature from the site plan. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
44. [Commentj Clearly label the pad that is located within the camping area, currently the wording is not
legible. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
45. [Condition of SP2014-15j Provide a detail of the gates being utilized in the child play area, Certify that the
gates also meet ASTM Standard 12049. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
Please contact Christopher P. Perez in the Planning Division by using cperezAalbemarle.org or 434-296-5832
ext. 3443 for further information.
5
Christopher Perez
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 4:10 PM
To: 'Justin Shimp, P.E.'
Cc: Carolyn Schuyler
Subject: SDP2016-14 Wildrock—final site plan
Attachments: CD2 SDP201600014 Wildrock-final site plan 6-29-16.pdf
Justin,
SDP2016-14 Wildrock—final site plan
Attached is the review comments for the above project. It seems VDOT still has an outstanding item they are
working w/you to resolve. Once I receive VDOT's official comment letter I'll send it to you and Carolyn.
Then I'll await a revision (if needed)to address the outstanding issue. VDOT approval is required.
Engineering has no objections to the revised plan.
Other than VDOT approval Planning has no objections at this point.
All other reviewers have no objections at this point as well.
Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner
Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext.3443
From:Christopher Perez
Sent:Wednesday,June 29, 2016 4:03 PM
To:Carolyn Schuyler<carolynlcsw@comcast.net>
Cc: Frank Pohl<fpohl@albemarle.org>;John Anderson<janderson2@albemarle.org>; Rebecca Ragsdale
<rragsdale@albemarle.org>;Judy Martin- BC/ZS<jmartin4@albemarle.org>
Subject:SDP2016-14 Wildrock—final site plan
Carolyn,
SDP2016-14 Wildrock—final site plan
See my responses below in red.
Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner
Department of Community Development ICounty of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3443
Original Message
From: Carolyn Schuyler [mailto:carolynlcsw@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 10:44 AM
To: Christopher Perez<cperez(cr�albemarle.org>
Subject: Wildrock
Hi Chris,
1
w.
'tir
I wanted to check in about Wildrock to see when you think we are likely to get final approval.
I have completed my review of the revised final site plan and all planning items are addressed, with the
exception of VDOT's approval of the entrance. Seems VDOT still has an outstanding item they are working w/
Justin Shimp to resolve. Once I receive VDOT's official comment letter I'll send it to Justin Shimp and you.
Then I'll await a revision (if needed)to address the outstanding issue. VDOT approval is required.
I want to make sure I understand the process from here on out. Once the plan has been approved, DEQ has
approved it, and the bonding is complete, it is my understanding we need the preconstruction meeting and a
meeting with zoning. I believe that guidance was coming from John Anderson's email for an early mass grading
plan post WPO plan approval. I'm CCing John Anderson and Frank Pohl (County Engineer)to guide you for an
early mass grading plan if you choose to go that route.
Is that correct?
Also, I would appreciate some direction as to what will be expected before we can open to the public in terms of
inspections. Also is there a time table for inspections?
After the final site plan is approved I no longer am involved with the project. I am generally familiar w/the next
steps you need to take but advise you to contact staff in Zoning and Intake to proceed to the next steps.
Please contact Judy Martin w/Intake and/or Rebecca Ragsdale w/Zoning. They can direct you to your next
steps after a final site plan has been approved, and provide the appropriate forms, required fee amounts, and
possible time frames. Judy's phone# is 434.296.5832 ext. 3198. and Rebecca's extension is 3226. I've CCed
them to this email as well.
Thank you for your help.
Carolyn Schuyler
2
Original Message
From: Carolyn Schuyler [mailto:carolynlcsw@comcast.net]
Sent:Thursday,June 23, 2016 10:44 AM
To: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org>
Subject:Wildrock
Hi Chris,
I wanted to check in about Wildrock to see when you think we are likely to get final approval. I want to make sure I
understand the process from hear on out.
Once the plan has been improved, DEQ has approved it, and the bonding is complete, it is my understanding we need
the preconstruction meeting and a meeting with zoning.
Is that correct?
Also, I would appreciate some direction as to what will be is expected before we can open to the public in terms of
inspections. Also is there a time table for inspections?
Thank you for your help.
Carolyn Schuyler
2
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SHIMP CIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
)
June 14, 2016
Mr. Chris Perez
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Regarding: Wildrock Day Camp—SDP-2016-00014
SDP Comments
Dear Mr. Perez,
Thank you for your review of the Final Site Plan for Wildrock. We have revised the plans per your
comments dated May 2, 2016.
1. Previously Addressed.
2. Previously Addressed.
(`3.% We have revised the site plan to meet the comments provided by VDOT on Aptil 19, 2016. We have
attached an additional comment response letter for their comments.
,A. We have altered the offending ditch design along the road to address the comment provided by the
county engineer. A separate comment response has been attached for Mr. Anderson's comment.
Comments 5-36: Previously Addressed.
✓37 Tier III Groandwater Assessment has been approved as of 5/26/2016.
✓38. VSMP Application (WPO 2016-00027) has been reviewed and approved as of 5/26/2016.
Comments 39-45: Previously Addressed.
Attached with this letter is 6 copies of the Wildrock SDP. If you have any questions please feel free to contact
me via e-mail at keane(a�shimp-engineering.com or Justin Shimp at Justinshimp-engineering.com or by
telephone at 434-227-5140.
Sincerely,
Keane Rucker, E.I.T.
Shimp Engineering
PROJA
CIVILECT ME NGINEERINGNAGEMENT
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
June 14, 2016
Mr. Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Resident Engineer
Culpeper District
VDOT
Regarding: Wildrock Day Camp—SDP-2016-00014
VDOT SDP Comments
Dear Mr. DeNunzio,
Thank you for your review of the Final Site Plan for Wildrock. We have revised the plans per your
comments dated May 11, 2016.
1. The tree line has been moved back to provide adequate sight distance. The decision points B&C have
been placed in the center of the travel lanes as well. All sight lines from the new entrance are clear and
free of obstruction and do not lie outside the 15' proscriptive easement of Rte. 810. Due to this fact no
offsite sight easements are required.
2. The note"New site distance lies within the existing sight lines..." has been removed.
3. The 15' proscriptive easements have been labelled on the plans.
Attached with this letter is a copy of the Wildrock SDP. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me
via e-mail at keane(a,shimp-engineering.com or Justin Shimp at Justin(a)shimp-engineering.com or by
telephone at 434-227-5140.
Sincerely,
Keane Rucker, E.I.T.
Shimp Engineering
NNW
SHIMP PROJECT MANAGEMENT
CIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
June 14, 2016
Mr. John Anderson
Civil Engineer
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Regarding: Wildrock Day Camp—SDP-2016-00014
SDP Comments
Dear Mr. Anderson,
Thank you for your review of the Final Site Plan for Wildrock. We have revised the plans per your
comments dated April 21, 2016.
1. We have revised the paved entrance and gravel access road sections as requested. Both the plan and
the sections show 3'shoulders with a minimum of 4'from the edge of shoulder to the ditch centerline.
This discrepancy arose from early edits to the radius of the access road and was not fixed with the
previous revisions.
Attached with this letter is a copy of the Wildrock SDP. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me
via e-mail at keane(c�shimp-engineering,com or Justin Shimp at Justin a.shimp-engineering.com or by
telephone at 434-227-5140.
Sincerely,
Keane Rucker, E.I.T.
Shimp Engineering
Christopher Perez
From: John Anderson
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 1:26 PM
To: Carolyn Schuyler; Christopher Perez; Mark Graham
Cc: Frank Pohl; Todd Shifflett; Ana Kilmer; Justin Shimp, P.E.; Keane Rucker
Subject: WPO201600027-Wildrock NSMP-(Mass)Grade Permit _. . „n, /
Attachments: WPO_Virginia_Erosion_and_Sediment_Control_Program_Pre-.-- r Qh
Construction_Meeting_and_Permit_Request.pdf ,.--''
czto
onie ,
Carolyn, f—;-'7—/6'
I realize you spoke with Christopher Perez earlier today.
I've searched for your tel. number, without luck. I hope this note is helpful a . clea
I spoke with Christopher and Mark Graham earlier today. We reviewe• ode section 18-32.4.2.8,Effect an Approved
Initial Site Plan has on Certificates of Appropriateness and Early or ass Grading. Wildrock has an approved initial site
plan that does not impose conditions of approval relative to Masa •radin•. Project VSMP was approved 26-May 2016—
bonding is in process. VSMP ESCP grading is identical with • nal Site Plan grading,but not all Final Site Plan comments
have been addressed. 18-32.4.2.8 provides mechanism wh- eby site grading may be approved. We recommend the
following steps required to receive a(mass)grade permi or this project prior to Final Site Plan Approval:
• Work with Ana Kilmer to post bonds—I s.• e with Ana earlier today. Signature documents have been forwarded
to Attorneys for legal review.
• Ana can do no more at the moment—we are waiting on legal review. You needn't call Ana, but she is point of
contact.
• Once Ana contacts you to provide ESCP bond estimate,please post ESCP bond as quickly as possible.
• Once ESCP bond is posted,Ana will notify Engineering that bond is posted.
• Once notified,Todd Shifflett will upload project data to VDEQ SWCGP database.
• Typically within 3-4 days VDEQ will send electronic request to Applicant for payment of state-portion of VSMP
permit fee.
• Typically within 3-4 days of receipt of payment, VDEQ will send electronic .PDF permit coverage letter to
you. (the Applicant)
• As soon as you receive this permit coverage letter, contact Todd Shifflett. Submit Attached request for a pre-
construction meeting(.PDF form).
• Typically within 2-3 days, we should be able to schedule a pre-construction meeting. At this meeting, remaining
county-portion of VSMP permit fee is collected, and Grading Permit issued.
For the moment, we are waiting on legal review—once we have signature approval, we should have a greater level of
control. At that point,please post bonds as quickly as possible.
I am hopeful we may still make late-Jun target for pre-construction meeting/Grading Permit issuance. Please let us know
if you have any questions. Thanks for your patience.
Thanks, Christopher
Thanks, Mark
J. Anderson, 434.296-5832—x3069
From:Carolyn Schuyler [mailto:carolynlcsw@comcast.net]
Sent:Sunday,June 12, 2016 6:04 PM
To:John Anderson<janderson2@albemarle.org>
Subject: Re:J.Anderson,Albemarle County
Importance: High
1
Naw 440,
HI John,
Congratulations on your new job! I hope it will be a great new experience.
I wondered if I could schedule a brief meeting with you before you transition because I have a Building
Goodness volunteer engineer willing to build a high quality bridge over the stream, and he wants to fully
understand the site plan requirements. I would also like to ask you a few questions about the final plan. I
would think it would not take more than 15 minutes. If this will work for you, could you let me know a few
times and I will let the engineer know and try to schedule it.
Thanks again for everything,
Carolyn Schuyler
On Jun 12, 2016, at 10:26 AM, John Anderson <janderson2 ct,albemarle.org> wrote:
All,
I transfer to Facilities and Environmental Services on 20-Jun, another County department.
I transition away from plan review on 16-Jun, my last day with Community Development.
Please correspond with me on project or review issues through 16-Jun.
I will redirect correspondence if necessary(e-mail valid/unchanged).
Community Development is advertising positions, but the process takes time.
Thank you for your patience, support, and understanding in the interim.
It has been a privilege to work with you.
I am truly grateful.
Warm regards,
J. Anderson
Note:
Frank Pohl is Albemarle County Engineer. •
Frank is point of contact after 16-Jun.
thank you
John E.Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext.3069
2
Nor-
Noe
Christopher Perez
From: John Anderson
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2016 7:21 AM
To: Justin Shimp, P.E.
Cc: Christopher Perez
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP201600014 Wildrock- Final.
The Review for the following application has been completed: •
Application Number=SDP201600014
Reviewer =John Anderson
Review Status = Requested Changes + 4-5
Completed Date = 05/15/2016
Thanks for your patience.
Review comments:
"GWA/Groundwater Management Plan,Draft, 29-Apr 2016
1. Provide professional seal with Final Report(if possible; sealed is preferable to signed-only report).
2. Delete reference to rain garden,p. 1 and next to last p. of report.
3. Recommend number report pages. (Hand-lettering is fine.)
4. Note: Engineering accepts anticipated site withdrawal is 0.2%(±)estimated recharge rate(excluding drain field
recharge). Engineering further accepts that"the proposed use as a day camp with primitive campsites and
education center" should not imperil on-site availability of groundwater. Tier 3 GWA establishes that parcel plus
up-gradient forested acreage off-parcel to the north(735 Ac.)may provide 360,885 GPD due to favorable
subsurface formations. Report states "Successful water wells have both a reliable source of recharge(in this
setting, colluvial material), and an open network of bedrock fractures that connect with the recharge
source. TMP6-26B has both of these ingredients." Compare .36 MGD (average)recharge rate with 765 GPD
predicted maximum daily groundwater withdrawal. "These numbers indicated that the proposed use of
groundwater is negligible relative to the abundance of groundwater that naturally occurs on the
parcel." Engineering accepts report values and conclusions.
5. Report states"A 60+gallon per minute well has recently been drilled on the parcel." Please provide copy of this
(exploratory)well test report.
434.296-5832—x3069
1
,.
,..... ,....,
.. sHimp
PROJECT AE
CIVIL MEAN
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
April 15th, 2016
Mr. Christopher Perez
Albemarle County
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Regarding: Final Site Plan—Wildrock
SDP 2016-00014
Comment Response Letter
Dear Mr. Perez,
Thank you for your review of the Wildrock Final Site Plan. We have reviewed and revised the plan
per your most recent comments dated 04/06/16. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments.
Final Site Plan:
'omment Noted. We have revised the plan per VDOT's most recent comments.
' ' The note has been added to the cover sheet as note 4 under"special zoning conditions"as
*:, eviously requested. Additional dimensions are now shown for the ditch width and depth. See
/details 3 and 4 on sheet C7.
11. Total impervious cover calculations are now shown on sheet C1 under"proposed use."
4. The total paved/gravel areas proposed are now shown on sheet C1 under"proposed use."
tip. A typical bumper block detail is now shown as detail 11 on sheet C7.
✓14 a 100' stream buffer limits are now accurately depicted on sheets C2-05.
. The proposed outdoor wall mounted fixture is a maximum 60 watt incandescent bulb. A 60 watt
bulb produces approximately 800 lumens which is well under the 3,000 lumen level which would
make a photometric plan required. All fixtures are"dark sky"compliant as shown per catalog detail
on sheet C7. The requested lighting note has been added to the catalog detail. Per our
c versation on the phone I have also included photometric values along the property line in
uestion showing no light spill over exists. See sheet C4.
The tree conservation checklist has been removed from the plan. There are no existing trees within
the area of disturbance that will be impacted. All existing vegetation that is counted toward the
required tree canopy area is well outside the limits of disturbance.
V"' The proposed landscaping for the screening along the property line has been revised as requested.
The screening also continues to the front property line as our existing treelines were previously
'ncorrect. See sheet C6.
-11k.. }le proposed street trees are now shown behind the sight distance lines as shown on sheet C6.
' ` e tier 3 assessment is not complete at this time and will be submitted under a separate cover
C ortly.
6omment noted. The VSMP application is scheduled to be submitted for review at the same time
as this resubmittal.
A. The applicable SDP number for this plan is now shown under the main title on sheet Cl.
The health department has been added to the signature panel on sheet Cl.
The parking calculation note has been revised as requested. See sheet Cl.
N The labeling of the existing fencing that will remain or be demolished has been revised throughout
the plan.
e existing gravel driveway and entrance proposed to be removed is now shown as such
throughout the plan.
The existing concrete pad is now labeled clearly as requested. See sheet C5.
45. A gate detail is now shown on sheet C7 as detail number 14.
If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at
(434) 227-5140 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail.
Best Regards,
0/// lll�
Chris Norvelle
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SHIM CIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
April 15th, 2016
Mr. John Anderson
Albemarle County
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Regarding: Final Site Plan—Wildrock
SDP 2016-00014
Comment Response Letter
Dear Mr. Anderson,
Thank you for your review of the Wildrock Final Site Plan. We have reviewed and revised the plan
per your most recent comments dated 04/06/16. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments.
Final Site Plan:
1. The legend is now also shown on sheet C3 as requested.
2. The existing contours are now labeled on sheet C2.
3. The handicap parking spaces and aisle is now dimensioned. See sheet C4.
4. The ditch width and depth is now shown on details 3 and 4 on sheet C7.
5. The 100' stream buffer limits are now shown correctly throughout the site.
6. The stream buffer limits along the frontage of the property is now shown correctly and completely.
7. The typical road section detail for the gravel access road is dimensioned and labeled as requested.
See details 3 and 4 on sheet C7.
8. The VSMP application and plan is scheduled to be submitted concurrent with this resubmittal.
9. Comment noted.
If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at
(434) 227-5140 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail.
Best Regards,
avr
Chris Norvelle
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
PROJECTMANAGEMENT ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERING
April 15th, 2016
Mr. Joel DeNunzio
Virginia Department of Transportation
Regarding: Final Site Plan—Wildrock
SDP 2016-00014
Comment Response Letter
Dear Mr. DeNunzio,
Thank you for your review of the Wildrock Final Site Plan. We have reviewed and revised the plan
per your most recent comments dated 04/11/16. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments.
Final Site Plan:
1. After reviewing appendix F of the road design manual the proposed entrance as shown meets the
required design geometry of the expected design vehicles of this site.
2. The sight distance lines for the existing entrance for Byrom Park is now shown on detail 10 on
sheet C7. The proposed sight distance lines lie within the existing sight lines of the VDOT permitted
entrance for the park eliminating the need for sight easements.
3. Vertical sight distance profiles are now shown as details 12 and 13 on sheet C7.
4. A dimension is now shown on detail 10 of sheet C7 to show that the separation requirement
between entrances is adequate.
5. The proposed culvert at the entrance is now labeled as requested. A typical culvert installation
detail is also provided on sheet C4.
If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at
(434) 227-5140 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail.
Best Regards,
01/11
Chris Norvelle
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
Christopher Perez
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 8:31 AM
To: 'Sophie Johnston'
Cc: Justin Shimp
Subject: Landscaping Comments
Sophie,
It goes without saying but the screening for this project is of high priority being this is a commercial use (day
and night uses) going in the rural areas adjacent to a residential use. I respect all the hard work your volunteers
are doing, we just need to assure the requirements of the ordinance are met and the final site plan is accurate.
For screening purposes the minimum planting strip shall be 20' deep. The planting strip provided is only 10'
deep; however, there is 15' of space available between the fence and the property line. Because the minimum
depth is below the required 20' I feel it's appropriate to require double staggered row of evergreen trees in this
area and not merely double staggered row of 18" shrubs. I'm willing to work with you on this but I'd like at
least a row of evergreen trees (a min of 4' tall at planting) within this planting strip in addition to a row of 18"
shrubs.
What is the botanical name of the Eastern Red Cedars you planted? Is it a"Juniperus virginiana" ? If not, what
is it?
The County's approved plant canopy list has that plant as an evergreen tree rather than a shrub. Please specify.
To solidify this on the landscape plan provide plant types, their minimum height at planting (evergreen trees 4'
& evergreen shrubs 18"), list which row of plantings is the Eastern Red Cedar and which is the Southern Wax
Myrtle, provide plant counts for each type. It will also be permissible for you to utilize this same planting
schedule for the remaining screening to Blackwell Hollow Road. However the screening near the barn and
parking areas (more intensive uses) needs to be a double staggered row of evergreen trees a min of 4' —6' tall
planted 15' on center within a 20' planting strip.
Hope this helps.
Christopher P. Perez 1 Senior Planner
Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3443
From:Sophie Johnston [mailto:sjohnstonla@gmail.com]
Sent:Thursday,April 14, 2016 12:42 AM
To:Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd: Comments
Hi Chris,
I'm the landscape architect working with Justin Shimp's office to response to the comments for Wildrock. We
met at the pre-app meeting for this project.
I have a question with regard to the landscape plan. In note 34, there's a request to change the screening shrubs
to screening trees, 15'on center. Carolyn Schuyler wanted to get a jump start on some planting so we installed
a portion of this screening(highlighted in red on the attached plan). Before planting, I reviewed the code and
1
read the following under 32.7.9.7 Screening, under d: "If a planting strip is rovided, the plant materials shall
consist of a double staggered row of evergreen trees planted 15 on center, or a double staggered row of
evergreen shrubs planted 10'on center, or an alternative vegetative screening approved by agent".
Where shown we planted two staggered rows (10' o.c) of Eastern Red Cedar and Southern WaxMyrtle. Both of
these are evergreen and grow quickly and will be well over 4'in maybe just a year or two. This section of the
playground is very low intensive with activities such as nest building and natural obstacle courses. We are
planning to put larger specimens in between the barn/upper play yard and the house on the neighboring property
as we realize that there will be a little more activity here. We can also extend the planting to Black Hollow's
Road but would like to take the same approach with the cedars and wax myrtle if acceptable (evergreen shrubs
planted 10' o.c.) as there is a wooded area adjacent on the neighbor's property.
Carolyn and her husband and volunteers worked really hard to get some of these shrubs in the ground this past
fall. It would be very much appreciated if you would allow us to keep these shrubs as they are so that they can
focus their energies on additional planting beyond the screening.
I think that Justin is hoping to submit the revisions tomorrow so I would very much appreciate your
thoughts. I'm available by phone also at 434.284.1727.
Thanks Chris.
Sophie
Sophie Johnston Landscape Architect
1845 James Monroe Parkway
Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.284.1727
2
•
Christopher Perez
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 9:35 AM
To: 'Sophie Johnston'
Cc: Justin Shimp
Subject: RE: Landscaping Comments
Attachments: SKM_364e-En 16041509340.pdf
Sophie,
See my comments below in red.
Christopher P.Perez Senior Planner
Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext.3443
From:Sophie Johnston [mailto:sjohnstonla@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday,April 15, 2016 9:09 AM
To:Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org>
Cc:Justin Shimp<justin@shimp-engineering.com>
Subject: Re: Landscaping Comments
Hi Chis,
Thanks for your email and consideration. I'll plan to make the requested modifications. I do want to confirm a
few things:
1. Are you saying that from the barn area east to Blackwell Hollows Road (basically the red dashed zone on my
diagram eastward), we can leave the planting in the existing configuration as long as we make sure that we have
one row of evergreen trees? Yes. One row of evergreen trees and one row of evergreen shrubs will be
permissible in that location (see attached PDF for visual).
Yes, the Eastern Red Cedar(Juniperus virginiana) is classified as a tree on your list. Because I wanted to do a
mix of alternating clumps of eastern red cedar and wax myrtle with tighter spacing, I assumed it would be okay
to classify the cedar as a shrub too. No. Classify the plantings as they truly are. If they are shrubs call them
shrubs if they are trees call them trees. The plantings onsite will need to match the final site plan. After the final
site plan is approved and the items are installed County Inspectors will be going to the site and verifying that
everything depicted on the approved final site plan matches what is in the field.
If the cedars in place are a minimum of 4', can we just leave them as they are and replace the back row of
Southern Wax Myrtle with more cedar trees, keeping the existing 10' spacing? Yes, that is fine. It might stunt
the full development of these trees a bit being they will be closer together but it may also provide for a tighter
treeline. PS. I think the Southern Wax Myrtles may have died over the winter and will need to be planted again
anyways.
2. If we only have 15' of space on the south side of the fence and we need a 20' strip, I'm assuming that we'll
need to have one row on the back side of the fence and one row in front of the fence adjacent to the barn and
the parking. Is this what you're suggesting? Yes, if that is what it takes. Otherwise the fence could be relocated
for this section and pushed 5 feet closer to the structures and plantings placed in that section. Or you could do a
1
. double staggered row of evergreen trees within the 15' of planting space and then a single row of 18" shrubs on
the other side of the fence to gain the 20' depth.
Thanks Chris.
Sophie
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> wrote:
Sophie,
It goes without saying but the screening for this project is of high priority being this is a commercial use (day
and night uses) going in the rural areas adjacent to a residential use. I respect all the hard work your volunteers
are doing, we just need to assure the requirements of the ordinance are met and the final site plan is accurate.
For screening purposes the minimum planting strip shall be 20' deep. The planting strip provided is only 10'
deep; however, there is 15' of space available between the fence and the property line. Because the minimum
depth is below the required 20' I feel it's appropriate to require double staggered row of evergreen trees in this
area and not merely double staggered row of 18" shrubs. I'm willing to work with you on this but I'd like at
least a row of evergreen trees (a min of 4' tall at planting) within this planting strip in addition to a row of 18"
shrubs.
What is the botanical name of the Eastern Red Cedars you planted? Is it a"Juniperus virginiana" ?If not, what
is it?
The County's approved plant canopy list has that plant as an evergreen tree rather than a shrub. Please specify.
To solidify this on the landscape plan provide plant types, their minimum height at planting (evergreen trees 4'
& evergreen shrubs 18"), list which row of plantings is the Eastern Red Cedar and which is the Southern Wax
Myrtle, provide plant counts for each type. It will also be permissible for you to utilize this same planting
schedule for the remaining screening to Blackwell Hollow Road. However the screening near the barn and
parking areas (more intensive uses) needs to be a double staggered row of evergreen trees a min of 4' —6' tall
planted 15' on center within a 20' planting strip.
Hope this helps.
Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner
Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext.3443
From:Sophie Johnston [mailto:siohnstonla@gmail.com]
Sent:Thursday,April 14, 2016 12:42 AM
To:Christopher Perez<cperezPalbemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd:Comments
2
Hi Chris,
I'm the landscape architect working with Justin Shimp's office to response to the comments for Wildrock. We
met at the pre-app meeting for this project.
I have a question with regard to the landscape plan. In note 34, there's a request to change the screening shrubs
to screening trees, 15' on center. Carolyn Schuyler wanted to get a jump start on some planting so we installed
a portion of this screening (highlighted in red on the attached plan). Before planting, I reviewed the code and
read the following under 32.7.9.7 Screening, under d: "If a planting strip is provided, the plant materials shall
consist of a double staggered row of evergreen trees planted 15 on center, or a double staggered row of
evergreen shrubs planted 10'on center, or an alternative vegetative screening approved by agent".
Where shown we planted two staggered rows (10' o.c) of Eastern Red Cedar and Southern WaxMyrtle. Both
of these are evergreen and grow quickly and will be well over 4' in maybe just a year or two. This section of
the playground is very low intensive with activities such as nest building and natural obstacle courses. We are
planning to put larger specimens in between the barn/upper play yard and the house on the neighboring
property as we realize that there will be a little more activity here. We can also extend the planting to Black
Hollow's Road but would like to take the same approach with the cedars and wax myrtle if acceptable
(evergreen shrubs planted 10' o.c.) as there is a wooded area adjacent on the neighbor's property.
Carolyn and her husband and volunteers worked really hard to get some of these shrubs in the ground this past
fall. It would be very much appreciated if you would allow us to keep these shrubs as they are so that they can
focus their energies on additional planting beyond the screening.
I think that Justin is hoping to submit the revisions tomorrow so I would very much appreciate your
thoughts. I'm available by phone also at 434.284.1727.
Thanks Chris.
Sophie
Sophie Johnston Landscape Architect
1845 James Monroe Parkway
3
Christopher Perez
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 10:15 AM
To: Carolyn Schuyler
Cc: Scott Clark; John Anderson; Justin Shimp
Subject: RE: question
Attachments: SDP201600014 Wildrock-final site plan 4-6-16.pdf
Carolyn,
The final site plan needs to be approved prior to site work beginning. Prior to final site plan approval a WPO plan shall be
submitted, reviewed,and approved.This item will take a lot of time and needs to be submitted asap.Also the proposal
needs a Tier III groundwater study submitted, one has not been submitted yet. I would work with Justin Shimp to get a
read on when he thinks you can have an approved final site plan based on submittals of the above.
Final site plan status update: comments on the final site plan went out last week. I have received approvals from Fire
and Rescue, Inspections, Health Department, and E911. Engineering(comments below) and Planning(attached) have
requested revisions. I have not received comments from VDOT yet, but once I do I will forward them to you. Hope this
helps.
Engineering Comments in County View:
1. Copy Legend from C2 to C3.
2. Label existing contours, C2.
3. Label handicapped parking space/aisle width.
4. Provide site access ditch (W' x D')dimensions.
5. Show/label stream buffer for south fork stream: C2, C3,C5 (ref. GIS).
6. Show portion of stream buffer near relocated entrance along front, eastern edge of property.
7. Revise gravel access road and entrance typical sections(C7)to show a minimum of four(4)feet from the edge of
the shoulder to the ditch centerline [14-412.A.2.(a.)]. Also,#4, above.
8. Final Site Plan approval requires an Approved VSMP. Please submit VSMP Application.
9. Note: Remaining SDP201500053 Initial Site Plan comments addressed.
434.296-5832—x3069
Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner
Department of Community Development 'County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3443
Original Message
From:Scott Clark
Sent: Monday,April 11, 2016 10:00 AM
To: Carolyn Schuyler<carolynlcsw@comcast.net>
Cc: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: question
Hi, Carolyn--
If I understand correctly,the final site plan for Wildrock is still under review. I've copied Christopher Perez on this e-mail,
since he's reviewing that site plan. He will know more about when that process could be completed.As I understand it,
construction can only begin after the site plan and erosion &sediment control approvals are in place.
Noe
--Scott
Original Message
From: Carolyn Schuyler[mailto:carolynlcsw@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday,April 08, 2016 1:51 PM
To:Scott Clark<Sclark@albemarle.org>
Subject: question
Hi Scott,
I hope all is well with you. I wondered if you could give me a rough estimate of when Wildrock can expect to start
construction. Building Goodness is doing the playground this summer and we need to get some dates figured out. We
hope is will me no later than mid-May.
Thanks!
Carolyn Schuyler
Wildrock
2
Christopher Perez
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 3:59 PM
To: Justin Shimp
Cc: John Anderson
Subject: SDP2016-14 Wildrock- Final site plan
Justin,
Below are John Anderson's comments for SDP2016-14 Wildrock - Final site plan.
From:John Anderson
Sent:Wednesday,April 06, 2016 2:53 PM
To:Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org>
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP201600014 Wildrock- Final.
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number= SDP201600014
Reviewer =John Anderson
Review Status = Requested Changes
Completed Date =04/06/2016
CV comments:
1. Copy Legend from C2 to C3.
2. Label existing contours, C2.
3. Label handicapped parking space/aisle width.
4. Provide site access ditch(W' x D')dimensions.
5. Show/label stream buffer for south fork stream: C2, C3, C5 (ref. GIS).
6. Show portion of stream buffer near relocated entrance along front, eastern edge of property.
7. Revise gravel access road and entrance typical sections(C7)to show a minimum of four(4) feet from the edge of
the shoulder to the ditch centerline [14-412.A.2.(a.)]. Also, #4, above.
8. Final Site Plan approval requires an Approved VSMP. Please submit VSMP Application.
9. Note: Remaining SDP201500053 Initial Site Plan comments addressed.
434.296-5832—x3069
Christopher Perez
From: Christopher Perez
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 2:51 PM
To: Justin Shimp
Cc: Margaret Maliszewski
Subject: SDP2016-14 Wildrock- Final site plan
Attachments: SDP201600014 Wildrock-final site plan 4-6-16.pdf
Justin,
SDP2016-14 Wildrock- Final site plan
Attached are my comments for the above referenced site plan.
I have received approvals from Fire and Rescue, Inspections, Health Department, and E911.
I have not received comments from Engineering nor VDOT yet, but once I do I will forward them to you.
Thanks 4
_1
Christopher P. Perez 1 Senior Planner
Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia
401 McIntire Road[Charlottesville,VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext.3443
1
Christopher Perez
From: Kirtley, Joshua(VDH)<Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov>
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 2:23 PM
To: Christopher Perez
Subject: Wildrock SDP2016-14
Chris:
With regards to the Wildrock site plan,this email is to verify that the applicant has an approved design for a
septic system and well on the property.
If you need anything further, please let me know.
Josh
Josh Kirtley
Environmental Health Technical Consultant
Onsite Sewage and Water Programs
Thomas Jefferson Health District
1138 Rose Hill Drive
Charlottesville,Virginia 22903
Office(434)972-6288
1