No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600076 Review Comments Plans Reviewed By 2017-03-31Woolen Mills Light Industrial Park — FSP SDP201600076 Engineering Comments (New comments in bold): 1. An approved VSMP plan and road plan are required before final site plan (FSP) approval. Response: A Road Plan has been provided with this submittal. I will check over this submitted road plan, but a finalized set of plans may not be required for FSP approval. Check with planning. 2. SP14 -- Remove SWM plans from FSP set. Response: SWM plans have been removed from the FSP set. 3. Provide field verification of existing topography conditions for parcel TMP 77-4013: All topography should be at least visually field verified by the designer within the last year (18-32.6.2). Response: The designer has field verified the existing topography conditions visually. Refer to note on sheet SP2 & SW2. 4. Proposed slopes greater than 3:1 shall have low maintenance (not grass) ground cover specified on plan (Design manual, sect. 8). Response: Proposed slopes greater than 3:1 will have low maintenance ground cover, see note on SP6. List approved groundcover mix; Indicate areas slopes 3:1 where groundcover installed as part of final stabilization. 5. Retaining walls: Any walls supporting roads, parking, infrastructure require engineered plans and computations. Submit structural computations for walls over 5' high. Specify all dimensions. All structural reinforcement, steal, or geogrids shall be specified. Show typical sections & details for any pipes through wall, bridged utilities, or manholes through geogrid (Design manual, sect. 8). Response: The applicant is aware that structural engineer plans are required to meet the requirements of the design manual section 8, and to obtain a separate building permit for wall construction. Refer to response 12a,b and c on VSMP comments. 6. Show wall foundations will not impact preserved slopes. Response: See note on sheet SP5 and refer to reponses 12a,b and c on VSMP comments. 7. The stormpipe leaving site does not appear to be discharging directly to a defined channel (MS-19). Response: The storm pipe now discharges into a proposed rip rap stilling basin and drainage... 8. Show that sight distances are free from obstructions. Response: The sight distances are shown to be free from obstructions, refer to sheet SP8. 9. SP5 -- Show landing labeled at road entrances. Response: Landings have been labeled at road entrances on sheet SP5. 10. Show that road entrances meet 4% grade for 40' in any direction (18-4.12.17). Response: The VDOT CG-11 design has been discussed with the County Engineer as being acceptable even though the design manual suggestion may not be met. Refer to sheet SP9. Specifically state what standards are not being met and what variance is being requested. Approval of variance has not been granted until confirmed in writing. 11. Show radii labeled at all road entrances. Response: All radii have been labeled. 12. SP4,SP5 -- FEMA floodplain limits and date labeled. Response: FEMA floodplain limits and date have been shown on all sheets. 13. Confirm sidewalk is 5' wide in front of Building 9. Response: The sidewalk is confirmed to be 5' in front of Building 9. It tapers to 4' across the northern most three spaces, which has been labeled. 14. Proposed 'Aerial Crossing #1' shown in floodplain may require a special use permit. Response: Per attached email from the County Engineer dated 2/10/2017, the storm pipe installation may disturb slopes by right. Aerial crossing have been removed. 15. Clarify 'Storm V pipe size (24", or 18"?). Response: Storm 1 pipe size has been shown properly. 16. Comments regarding SWM will be addressed with VSMP application. Response: Comment noted. 17. Disturbed area appears to be just over 5 acres, provide map of area showing total disturbance. 18. Offsite clearing requires approval and temporary easement from adjacent landowner (Where shown near Broadway CE access). 19. Show ditch created alongside Moores Creek Ln in grading plan (see VSMP plan, D.9. comment). 20. Show 24" culvert mentioned in narrative on existing sheet. 21. Correct or provide easement access: Limits of clearing and grading shown to be going outside property limits onto adjacent property (Broadway St entranceway). 22. Provide protection (SAF) around fuel storage areas. 23. Fuel and chemical storage units should be 50' (Min) from storm drain inlets. 24. Walls: a. 4' clearance for loading at top of wall (refer to detail). b. Detail is for maximum 15' tall walls. Provide details for walls over 15' tall. c. Detail does not provide for a stacked wall design (surcharge from a wall above). Provide confirmation that this wall design allows for additional surcharge in this stacked -wall configuration). d. Show accurate wall cross sections on the profiles (wall thicknesses are not accurate). e. Provide standard details/certification for storm pipe wall penetrations. VDOT details do not allow for penetrations from what I can find. Recommend piping under wall structure instead. f. Show guardrail on wall details to ensure posts do not conflict with wall considering batter of wall (check if meets VDOT standards). 25. Sheet SP11—Clearify note, show waterline. Callout pipe at station 11+90. 26. SP17—Provide info for Ditch 3. 27. The grade appears to exceed the 2% ADA requirements for most of the designated parking spaces; Provide spot shots. 28. Provide collection piping for all building downspots.