Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201800164 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2018-10-23COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 Road and Drainage plan review Project title: Old Trail Block 32 — Road Plans Project file number: SUB201800164 Plan preparer: Bill Ledbetter [bledbetter@roudabush.com] Owner or rep.: Dave Brockman [dave@oldtrailvillage.com] Date Received: 10 Sept 2018 Date of comments: 23 Oct 2018 Mr. Ledbetter, We have reviewed the above referenced plans and have the following comments: Engineering (Emily Cox) 1. WPO must be approved before road plan can be approved. 2. Provide a copy of permits relating to work in the floodplain. 3. Provide permission or easement to grade offsite as shown on the plan. 4. Proposed slopes must all be 2:1 or flatter and proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 must have low maintenance ground cover or steep slope seed mix specified on the plan. 5. Note the approved steep slopes exhibit on the plan (date of approval and title of exhibit). 6. Label Sheet 13, grading plan, not utility plan. 7. Ensure biofilter matches WPO Plan (grading and layout). 8. Show stormwater management facility easements. 9. The typical section on sheets 20 & 21 for Raynor & Charnwood should say private, not public. 10. Sight distance lines and easements should be unobstructed. SD#3(building), SD#2 (driveways/cars), and SD12(building) appear to have obstructions. 11. Maximum velocity in storm pipes is 15ft/s. 12. Provide pavement design calculations (flexible pavement worksheet). 13. Is this plan going to be phased? If so, provide phase lines and outline of plan/sequence. Planning (Andy Reitelbach) 1. See attached review comment letter dated Oct 23, 2018. VDOT (Adam Moore) 1. See attached review comment letter dated Oct 23, 2018. Fire Rescue (Shawn Maddox) 1. The second point of emergency access will be required prior to the construction of the 31 st structure in this phase. This should be acknowledged in a legally recorded document to ensure compliance. ACSA (Richard Nelson) 1. Still under review, see attached email. Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 3 GIS (Andrew) 1. No objection. ARB (Heather McMahon) 1. By a vote of 5:0 at the 2-12-18 ARB meeting, the board determined that the proposal does not require ARB review because the block will not be visible from the EC. No further ARB review is required. Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to discuss this review. Process; After approval, plans will need to be bonded. The bonding process is begun by submitting a bond estimate request form and fee to the Department of Community Development. One of the plan reviewers will prepare estimates and check parcel and easement information based on the approved plans. The County's Management Analyst will prepare bond agreement forms, which will need to be completed by the owner and submitted along with cash, certificates or sureties for the amounts specified. The agreements will need to be approved and signed by the County Attorney and County Engineer. This may take 2-4 weeks to obtain all the correct signatures and forms. Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance agreements will also need to be completed and recorded. The County's Management Analyst or other staff will prepare the forms and check for ownership and signature information. The completed forms will need to be submitted along with court recording fees. After bonding and agreements are complete, county staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county. After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre -construction conference. Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre -construction conference form, and pay the remainder of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre -construction conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre -construction conference, should everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that work may begin. County forms can be found on the county website forms center under engineering; http://www.albemarle.org/deptforins.asp?department--cdengmTo Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me either by email (ecox@albemarle.org) or by phone at 434-296-5832 ext. 3565. Sincerely, Emily Cox, P.E. Civil Engineer II k' 01Y AL vit�r�A County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434-296-5832 Memorandum To: Emily Cox (ecox cr,albemarle.org) From: Andy Reitelbach, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: October 23, 2018 Subject: SUB2018-00164 Old Trail Village — Block 32 - Road Plans Fax 434-972-4126 The County of Albemarle Planning Division will grant or recommend approval of the road plans referenced above once the following comments have been satisfactorily addressed. (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments may be added or eliminated based upon further review.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] [General Comment] A road plan must be a stand-alone document and should not include a site plan or other types of plans. 2. [General Comment] Please include a plan view of the road that is separate from the site plan, and include those items required by 18-32.6.6 and 14-304. (A list of items required to be included should also be in the checklist portion of the application document for a road plan, which may be easier to consult than the full ordinance sections.) Everything that is proposed to be in the right-of-way in the road plans, including the sidewalks, planting strips, signage, etc., should be shown and labelled on the aerial plan views. Also, include the dimensions of each element in the right-of-way, as well as the proposed paving materials (e.g., concrete for the sidewalks). 3. [General Comment] Please include a note on the road plans that the approval of road plans is only for those elements within the right-of-way. Approval of road plans does not grant approval of the entire site plan, or items outside of the right-of-way, such as parcel boundaries, open space locations, etc. 4. [General Comment] Include on the road plans some labels designating what type of street each street is, such as public or private, as well as the proposed right-of-way width. 5. [General Comment] The label on sheet 22 for Bishopgate Lane Extended incorrectly reads "Chancery Lane." Please fix. 6. [14-234] A private street request will be required for Bishopgate Lane Extended. See 14-233 and 14-234 for the requirements, justification, and findings that will need to be made for the private street. If the request is made outside of a subdivision application, a fee is required. In addition, the sidewalk and planting strips will need to be extended along this street, unless an exception or a variation to 14-422 and the application plan is requested and granted. 7. [14-234] A private street request will be required for Charnwood Street and Raylor Place. See 14-233 and 14-234 for the requirements, justification, and findings that will need to be made for the private street. If the request is made outside of a subdivision application, a fee is required. It appears, however, that these two streets may be intended to be alleys, as otherwise they would create double -frontage lots that must comply with 14-401. If they are proposed to be private alleys, please label them as such. Also, they will need to conform with the designs for alleys as shown on sheet 4 of the Application Plan and in chapter 14 of the County Code. 8. [32.5.2] The required street trees and other street landscaping should be shown on the road plans. Also include the landscaping schedule for these plants. 9. [ZMA2015-00001] Please include the proffers associated with this development in the road plans. 10. [General Comment] If there is going to be on -street parking, please include those areas on the plans. Per the Code of Development, on -street parking should be included. 11. [General Comment] Please include a note with the road plans that states the "Associated Plans" with this project, including the project numbers, which would be SDP201800069 for the final site plan. 12. [General Comment] Please be advised that the second point of emergency access will be required prior to the construction of the 31 st structure in this phase. This proposed emergency access route appears to continue on as an as-yet-unbuilt road on a neighboring property zoned RA, Rural Areas. Where is the connection point for this emergency access route proposed to be? 13. [General Comment] Please include a note in the road plans to state that all landscaping within the rights - of -way shall be installed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a structure in Block 32. 14. [14-208.3] In order to dedicate the right-of-way for the proposed public streets, an Application For A Special Lot must be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded. In accordance with Chapter 14, the special lot application does not necessarily need to be approved prior to approval of the road plan application. The applicant may submit the special lot application prior to road plan approval, after road plan approval but prior to construction, during road construction, or after road construction. Please be aware that any other subdividing of parcels proposing to use road frontage along the proposed public streets will not be approved until the right-of-way is dedicated. The same goes for the approval of any final site plans proposing uses on lots that would use frontage of the proposed public streets. Please feel free to contact staff to further discuss timing of the right-of-way dedication. 15. [ZMA2015-00001] Please include a note in the road plans to state that the roads will be designed to the standard specified in the ZMA201500001 Code of Development and application plan. Please contact Andy Reitelbach in the Planning Division by using areitelbachkalbemarle.org_or 434-296-5832 ext. 3261 for further information. Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Commissioner r.• COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper Virginia 22701 October 23, 2018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Emily Cox, P.E. Re: Old Trail Village Block 32-- Road Plan SUB-2018-00164 Review #1 Dear Ms. Cox: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Roudabush, Gale, & Associates, dated 10 September 2018, and offers the following comments: 1. The proposed plan does not meet SSAR connectivity requirements. An SSAR Waiver for connectivity is required. Note that the SSAR Exception Request received on 11 September 2018 was incomplete and the applicant was notified. 2. The Department recommends eliminating the public streets inside the loop allowing driveways to connect to the private alleys/streets. What is the purpose of the private streets that do not provide access to the lots or parking? Additionally, note that Appendix B(1) states that the minimum intersection spacing for a subdivision is 200 feet. 3. Why is there a reverse curve at STA 11+75 of Bishopgate Lane at the intersection with Chancery Lane? 4. Provide CG-12s where applicable; there are none shown. 5. Storm sewer pipes should cross streets at about 90 degrees; there are several that run parallel beneath the road/sidewalk. Also, sanitary manholes must be removed from the street. 6. Provide CD -Is & -2s where applicable on plans and profiles. Also show what structures that crossdrains tie in to in plan view. 7. The sag K-value at STA 16+64 of Bishopgate Lane does not meet the minimum requirements (26) for a 25 mph design speed. 8. Please label typical sections public/private. They all say "Public ROW". 9. Intersection sight distance Iines are labeled as sight distance easements on the sight distance sheets. Please clarify. 10. The right sight distance line at Bicknell St. and Bishopgate Lane (SD-3) passes through a proposed townhouse on Lot 40. 11. Please clarify the SD-8 profile; the sight distance line appears to be obstructed. 12. Please clarify the sight distance sheets. Not all street names are visible. The sight distance line should also be included on the overall plan view sheets. VirginiabOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING October 23, 2018 Emily Cox, P.E. Page 2 13. Sight lines that cut through lots, decks and/or fences may not be able to be built as they may create sight line obstructions. Please a note to this effect on the plans. 14. Where DI-3s are greater than 8 feet deep, DI-3AA, -3BB, or -3CC should be specified as applicable and those details should be provided. 15. The drainage structure key map on Sheet 30 is a very helpful idea and appreciated; however, the structure labels are not legible. I6. Street trees must be at least 30 feet from the curb radius at intersections. Please provide a copy of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Emily Cox From: Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 4:32 PM To: Emily Cox Subject: SUB2018-00164 Old Trail Village Blk 32 Road Plans Emily, SUB2018-00164 Old Trail Village Blk 32 Road Plans is currently under review. Thanks, Richard Nelson Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (434) 977-4511