HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800045 Review Comments Appeal to BOS 2019-01-14 (3)County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
434-296-5832
Memorandum
To: Scott Collins (scott@collins-engineering.com)
From: Christopher Perez, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: January 14, 2019
Subject: SDP2018-45 North Pointe — Northwestern Residential Area — 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.]
1. [4.11.4, SP2002-35, SP2002-47, ZMA2000-91 Access Easement to TMP 32-22K]. Improvements are
proposed within the existing access easements serving TMP 32-22K1, DB 1663 PG 648. Revise the
plan to omit all proposed improvements from the easements or work with the easement holder to vacate
and relocate the access easements.
The following improvements shall be removed from the easements: sanitary sewer lines serving the
development, retaining walls, residential lot 1 & lots 22-35, stormwater pipes and drainage
pipes/easements, a monument sign, two parking spaces, portion of Girard lane (Private Road), and the
fire hydrant. As proposed these improvements impede the use of the easements and shall not be
permitted. Revise. Final. Remove the turnaround for Girard Lane from the easement. Additionally,
inlet and manhole structures shall be located outside of the 50' grading easement leading to the
adiacent parcel. Landscaping shall also be removed from the easement. It also appears that pipes 5,
35, and 59 need to be deeper to allow construction of a future road in the easement. A profile and
rough design of a connector road in the easement is needed to verify that storm and other utilities
are shown deep enough. Provide this information for Engineering review and approval prior to final
site plan approval. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
2. [32.7.9.7, 14-401] Double Frontage. Throughout the plan there are numerous lots which are proposed
as double frontage lots. This type of lot layout is prohibited. As discussed at the site review meeting,
the applicant plans to revise some of the private roads to alleys to avoid some of the double frontage
issues. Where double frontage is unavoidable because of the design/layout, either provide 20' of
common area between the lot and the second street or request an agent approved variation with
required justification in 14-203.1(B). Staff is not compelled to support such a waiver without a 20'
buffer planted with screening trees as provided for in Section 32.7.9.7. Rev 1. Comment not
addressed for lots 7-14 (building # 2), lots 169-173 (building # 30), and lots 174-176 (building
#31) as they rely on the agent approved waiver mentioned above. Submit the waiver request and
appropriate justification. The waiver shall be approved prior to final site plan approval. The 20'
landscape easements adiacent to each of these buildings is not sufficient to justify an approval as
they are not provided the appropriate evergreen screening trees required by Section 32.7.9.7;
rather, street trees are planted in these areas. Revise these plantings to meet the requirements of
Section 32.7.9.7 and submit the required waiver w/ justifications.
Additionally, the portion of Dillon Drive adiacent to building # 2 is lacking the required 6'
landscape strip and the required street trees. To process this design a waiver shall be submitted
under Section 14-422(F). This waiver shall be acted on by the Planning Commission prior to
approval of the site plan. Otherwise, revise to provide these required improvements.
Also, the portion of Lewis and Clark Drive adjacent to building # 30 and #31 is lacking the
required street trees within the 6' landscape strip. Revise.
[32.7.2.2, 14-410(II), 14-234(C)3] Sidewalks and Landscape Strips. Provide sidewalks and landscape
strips on both sides of all private streets throughout the development, regardless of driveways.
Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. The portion of Dillon Drive adjacent to building # 2 is
lacking the required 6' landscape strip. To process this design a waiver shall be submitted under
Section 14-422(F). This waiver shall be acted on by the Planning Commission prior to approval
of the site plan. Otherwise provide the required improvements.
4. [32.7.2.2, 14-410(II), 14-422(D), 14-422(E), 14-422(F), 32.3.5(b)] Sidewalk and Landscape Strip
Design. The planting strips shall be located between the curb and the sidewalk. Final: Comment not
addressed. Rev 1. In order to flip the layout of the sidewalks and landscape strips a waiver shall
be approved. The applicant response letter states a waiver was submitted; however, no such
waiver request was found with the submittal. Please submit the required waiver and
appropriate iustification.
The previous versions of the plan and the rezoning that you cite in your justification were not
proposing subdivision of these units nor were the streets anything more than travelways. This
proposal seeks to subdivide each lot utilizing private streets as required frontage, as such the
private streets shall meet the standards in chapter 14.
Section 32.3.5 permits variations and exceptions of the required improvements listed under
Section 32.7.2.2, which utilize the private road standards in chapter 14. In order to flip the
layout of the sidewalks and landscape strips a waiver shall be approved. It is suggested the
applicant revise the justification to provide appropriate justifications under the applicable
section in the ordinance. The applicant has two options for the waiver: either
request the waiver under Section 32.3.5(b) for agent approval (of which staff is not inclined to
support) or request the waiver under Section 14-422(F) which shall be acted on by the Planning
Commission. Below are applicable sections for justification of each option:
Section 32.3.5(b)2 The agent may approve a request for a variation to substitute a required improvement upon finding that because of an
unusual situation, the developer's substitution of a technique, design or materials of comparable quality from that required by section 32.7
results in an improvement that substantially satisfies the overall purposes of this chapter in a manner equal to or exceeding the desired
effects of the requirement in section 32.7.
Section 14422(F)2. Consideration. In reviewing a request to vary or except any requirement for planting strips, the commission shall
consider whether: (i) a variation or exception to allow a rural cross-section has been granted; (ii) a sidewalk variation or exception has been
granted; (iii) reducing the size of or eliminating the planting strip promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model,
and the applicable neighborhood master plan; and (iv) waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood
model to be more fully achieved.
5. [32.7.2.2, 14-410, 14-412(4)B, Engineering Design Standard Manual] Sidewalks and Landscape
Strip. The necessary street improvements, sidewalks and landscape strips, are located outside of the
private street right-of-way and instead are located on individual lots in proposed easements. If this
design is to remain, all front setbacks shall be measured from the back of these easements. Staff
recommends these improvements be placed within the private right-of-ways. Final: Comment not
addressed. Rev 1. The private streets right-of-way is required to be a minimum of 30' wide. To
correct this deficiency at a minimum the sidewalk easements on each side of the private street
shall be included in the private street right-of-way.
6. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-9] Provide 5' wide bike lanes on each side of the Lewis and Clark. Revise.
Final: Comment not addressed. Cutsheets for the roads depict a 5' bike lane, however, sheet 5 and 6
label these lanes as 4' wide. VDOT requires a minimum of 5' bike lanes. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
7. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Provide a public access easement along the private street and sidewalks
for Aldrich Lane, which will connect to the publicly dedicated path within the greenway dedication
area. Final: Comment not adequately addressed. Continue the 20' public access easement along the
road and both sidewalk of Aldrich Lane to Lewis and Clark Drive. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
8. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Proffer 5.3.1(c)(1). Phase III Road Improvements required to be
approved and either build or bonded before final site plan approval.
(c) Phase III Road Improvements. Prior to approval of a subdivision plat or
site plan for any development of the Neighborhood Investments Property or any portion thereof,
Owner shall obtain all associated permits and post all associated bonds required for the
construction of the following road improvements (collectively, the "Phase III Road
Improvements") to the extent any such road improvements have not already been completed:
(1) Northernmost Entrance (opposite Lewis & Clark Drivc) on U.S.
Route 29:
(i) U.S. Route 29 Southbound — construction of left turn lane
with taper.
(ii) Northwest Passage from U.S. Route 29 to the south
property line of Tax Map 32, Parcel 22K as shown on the Application Plan.
(iii) U.S. Route 29 Northbound — construction of a right hand
turn lane, the geometries of which will be subject to VDOT approval.
(iv) If the traffic signal to be constructed by others is in place
prior to Owner commencing work on this Northernmost Entrance, and such traffic signal only
includes three legs, Owner shall add the fourth leg to the signal, which shall include additional
mast arms, signal heads and ancillary equipment necessary to support Northwest Passage's use
of the intersection, as determined by VDOT. If such traffic signal is not in place and the
vehicular traffic generated by the Project causes the VDOT signal warrants to be met, and VDOT
requires that a traffic signal be installed as a condition of the entrance permit, Owner shall install
such traffic signal.
Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment still relevant.
9. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Proffer 5.3.3.
5.3.3 Prior to the approval of plans for improvements at any U.S. Route 29 intersection,
Owner shall provide VDOT traffic signal network timing plans that VDOT finds acceptably
address the impacts of the proposed traffic signals for peak traffic periods.
Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment still relevant.
10. [SP2006-34 Condition #3 & ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-9 Proffer 4.1.] A revised CLOMR showing
the change in the floodplain will be required prior to final site plan and VSMP approval.
Rev 1. County Enuineerin2 has determined this is no longer needed based on the proposed
changes. Comment addressed.
11. [ZMA2013-07 Application Plan] Show areas of greenway and conservation areas from application
plan on all relevant sheets of the site plan. The plan should show clear labels and borders for each
feature. Areas to be dedicated to public use should be identified throughout the plan. Rev 1.
Comment addressed.
12. [ZMA2013-07 Application Plan] Once conservation lines are shown. Provide written certification
from a licensed surveyor or engineer confirming that the conservation line shown on the application
plan for ZMA 2013-07 and the conservation line shown on this site plan are in the exact same
location. A note on the plans will suffice. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
13. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 To ensure the long-term implementation of the zoning for the North
Pointe development, prior to final site plan approval provide written documentation from the owner of
TMP 32-23, Violet Hill Associates C/O Great Eastern Management Co, which states that they are
aware and agree to the following, which affect the use of their property.
Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
la. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-9, SP2002-721 Unit Types. The North Pointe development is required
to have a minimum of 205 multifamily units. The application plan lists the units in this section of
North Pointe (Northwestern Residential) as multifamily units. Currently single-family attached
townhomes on individual lots are proposed for this section. This modification in unit type is
permitted; however, staff feels it pertinent to notify the other owner of this modification as they will
be required to develop the minimum number of multifamily units on their property. Please provide
written documentation from the owner of TMP 32-23, Violet Hill Associates C/O Great Eastern
Management Co, that they are aware of this modification. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1.
Comment addressed.
lb. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Road Alignment. The alignment of Lewis and Clark Drive at the
shared property line of TMP 32-22K and TMP 32-23 is shifting locations from what was depicted on
the application plan. Provide written documentation from the adjacent property owner, Violet Hill
Associates C/O Great Eastern Management Co, that documents they are in agreeance with the shift in
alignment as proposed on the site plan under review. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1.
Comment addressed.
le. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Amenities and Open Space. The open space and amenities required
throughout the North Pointe development are to be accessible for use by all section of the
development. Provide written documentation from the adjacent property owner, Violet Hill Associates
C/O Great Eastern Management Co, that documents they understand this criteria. Each of the
developments Covenants and Restrictions documents and plans shall make note of this.
Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
14. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Proffer 9.1. Prior to final site plan approval, demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the County Engineer that stormwater basin 10 (currently labeled as SWM Facility A)
has enough room to be redesigned and enlarged to accommodate all stormwater from the future
elementary school lot located on TMP 32-23. Depict, label, and dimension all easements necessary for
this expansion on the facility, to also include access easements, temporary construction easements,
and permanent SWM facility easements. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
Additionally, provide the slope for the SWM access road. This shall meet county design standards.
Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
15. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-9] Proffer 8.2. Affordable Housing. Label the 28 units that are to be
affordable. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
16. [Comment] Road Alignment. The current alignment for Lewis and Clark Drive crosses onto a small
portion of TMP 32-22P. Prior to final site plan approval a boundary line adjustment shall take place.
Rev 1. Comment addressed on latest version of the dedication plat, pendink approval and
recordation.
17. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Revise the tracking of unit type throughout the plan. The proposed unit
types are attached townhomes, not multifamily, nor other, specifically list them as "Attached
Townhomes". Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
18. [4.12.16] Guest Spaces. Label all guest spaces on the plan. Final: Comment addressed.
19. [4.12.16] Parking Spaces. There is a typographical/math error for the parking provided. 409 is listed;
however, it should be 414, which equals parking required. Final: Comment addressed.
20. [Comment] Throughout the plan label and provide acreages of all open space, conservation,
greenway, and buffer areas. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
21. [Comment] Please depict, label, and dimension the garages for each lot. Rev 1. Comment not
addressed.
22. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-91 Setbacks. Revise the setbacks to match the setbacks for the unit type
"Attached Townhomes": Front min 8' and max 30', side 6', rear minimum 10' and max none. Garage
doorway 18'. Final: Comment not addressed. Currently the plan lists the front setback
maximum as 50'; however, 30' is the maximum. Revise it to 30' maximum. Also, Lot 143 and
144 do not meet maximum front setbacks. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
23. [Comment] Why is "Building 6" listed as a building type B, when building 1 and 13, located adjacent
to it are type A? Ensure all the building types are appropriately labeled throughout the plan. Final: the
developer's purview.
24. [SP2006-34] Condition #L County and VDOT approval of the final lane configuration for the
Northwest Passage over the stream crossing with the final road plans. Rev 1. Road plan still
pending.
25. [SP2006-34] Condition #2. County and VDOT approval of final design plans and
hydrologic/hydraulic computations for the stream crossing. Rev 1. Road plan still pending.
26. [SP2006-34] Condition #9. All of the above noted landscaping shall be shown on the road plans
submitted for the Northwest Passage prior to final site plan approval. The plans shall include complete
planting schedule key to the plan. The plans are subject to approval of the Design Planner.
Rev 1. Road plan still pending.
27. [SP2006-34] Condition #5. Provide a stream buffer mitigation plan for approval by the Natural
Resources Manager in accordance with this condition. Rev 1. Comments still relevant.
28. [SP2006-34, SP2002-72] Conditions. All conditions of the SPs remain valid and shall be complied
with prior to final site plan approval. Rev 1. Comments still relevant.
29. [32.6.2(d)] Water and sewer facilities. Provide profiles and cross sections of all water and sewer lines
including clearance where lines cross. Final: Comment addressed.
30. [32.6.2(d)] Water and sewer facilities. Provide the station on the plan to conform to the station shown
on the profile and indicate the top and invert elevation of each structure. Final: Comment addressed.
31. [32.6.2(d)] Water and sewer facilities. Provide all sewer appurtenances by type and number. Final:
Comment addressed.
32. [32.6.2(e)] Public facilities and utilities. All water and sewer facilities to be dedicated to public use
and the easements for those facilities and shall be identified by a statement that the facilities are to be
dedicated to the Albemarle County Service Authority. Final: Comment addressed.
33. [32.5.20)] Building 26 does not appear to be served by sewer, as a line does not run along its
frontage. Please verify. Final: Building # have been rearranged since initial site plan review.
34. [32.5.2(n) & 4.16] Recreational requirements of section 4.16 are applicable to Planned Development
zoning districts. Demonstrate how the recreational regulations will be met and if substitutions will be
provided with this portion of the development. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
35. [32.6.2(d)] Drainage easements outside of the public right-of-way shall not be dedicated to public use,
unless VDOT has agreed to accept and maintain these easements. Final: Comments for
informational purposes only.
36. [32.6.20)] Landscape plan. A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 is required with the
final site plan. Additionally, landscaping shall also be in conformity with the conditions of approval of
SP2006-34, ZMA2013-14. Rev 1. The landscape plan requires revisions pursuant to the
landscape comments throughout this comment review letter.
37. [32.7.9.4(b)] Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials in order to
satisfy the landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9, subject to the agent's approval.
If you intend to use existing trees to satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the
following:
1. Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall show the trees to be
preserved, the limits of clearing, the location and type of protective fencing, grade changes requiring
tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing.
2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to
ensure that the specified trees will be 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 III-393 through III-413, and as hereafter
amended. Final: Comment not addressed. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
38. [Comment] The final site plan shall not be approved until all SRC reviewers have approved the
plan. Their comments attached. Rev 1. Comment still relevant.
39. [Comment] Stormwater Basin B depicts proposed grading within the 100' stream butter. This is not
permitted. Revise. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
40. [ZMA2013-14, ZMA2000-9] Application Plan. The open space labeled and depicted on the cover
sheet (below) is required to be dedicated to the County per the rezoning. Revise. Rev 1. Comment
addressed.
41. [Proffer 2.1] Depict the entire 40-foot landscaped buffer on the landscape plan. Rev 1. Comment
omitted because the final plat for this area depicts and labels it.
42. [32.7.9.4(b)] Show trees to be preserved, the limits of clearing, the location and type of tree protective
fencing as required by this section. Rev 1. Comment addressed.
43. [Comment] Provide the SDP# on the cover sheet: SDP2018-45 North Pointe — Northwestern
Residential Area — Final Site Plan Rev 1. Comment addressed.
44. [Comment] This application was reviewed against Site Development Plan requirements only. Lot lines
and a `private road' are shown on the plan, but no subdivision application, nor private road request, nor
road plans have been submitted for this proposal. All subdivision and road related comments are
provided for reference only unless necessary for site plan approval.
45. [Comment] Boundary line adjustment and easement plats, road plan, and WPO plan shall be approved
prior to final site plan approval. Please submit these plans for County review and approval. Ensure the
road plan depicts all public and private streets. Notably, the first version of the road plan, which was
reviewed by Rachel for the previous version of the proposal only depicts the public road. The private
streets shall be included in the road plan.
46. [32.5.2(i), 15.2.1(3, 14-233(B)1, 14-233(B)1,14-234, 14-306] Submit a private street request, this must
be submitted and approved prior to final site plan approval. This private street request can be reviewed
administratively due to the presence of attached dwellings. A maintenance agreement for the private
street must be submitted for review and approval by the County Attorney's Office with the final
subdivision application.
47. [32.7.9.51 Street Trees. Street trees shall be selected from a current list of recommended large shade
trees approved by the agent, provided that medium shade trees may planted instead when the agent
determines that site conditions warrant smaller trees. Currently many of the street trees proposed along
the private streets are crape myrtles, redbuds, or yoshino cherries; however, these are not permitted and
shall be revised to medium deciduous trees. Revise these planting types to meet the minimum street tree
requirement of a medium or a large deciduous street tree throughout.
48. [4.12] Parking. The 6 guest parking spaces at the end of Girard Drive do not meet the minimum 10'
width requirement on a 20' aisle width. Revise.
49. [4.12] Parking. The 2 guest parking spaces at the end of Dillon Court do not meet the minimum 10'
width requirement on a 20' aisle width. Revise.
50. [4.12] Parking. The 10 guest parking spaces along Girard Drive do not meet the minimum 10' width
requirement on a 20' aisle width. Revise.
51. [Comment] While it was previously decided the proposed layout could be submitted for review without
the County requiring a variation to the rezoning, the proposal shall still meet all required county
standards or obtain waivers to these standards. The County permitting the project layout to move
forward without a variation shall not be a reason for justification of the waivers. It appears this
development is having substantial trouble meeting the minimum road standards for private streets. This
issue continues to be the driving force behind most of the remaining comments. Waivers are intended to
be the exception not a requirement for the project being able to be built. Staff suggests you redesign to
avoid any waivers.
Please contact Christopher Perez in the Planning Division by using cperezgalbemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext.
3443 for further information.
Fire and Rescue — Shawn Maddox
No objections
E911—Andrew Walker
1. No objection - The following road names have been reserved for this application: Aldrich Dr., Aldrich Ln.,
Girard Dr., Girard Way, Girard Terrace, Girard Ct., Dillon Ct., Dillon Dr.
Building Official — Mike Dellinger
1. No objection
ARB - Margaret Maliszewski
An action letter will be prepared and forwarded soon. A revised plan addressing these issues is required.
Motion: Mr. Binsted moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for ARB-2018-136 North Pointe Northwest
Residential Area Final Site Development Plan with the following revisions:
1. Revise the elevation drawings to include notes indicating that 1) a maximum of two adjacent facades shall be co-
planar, 2) adjacent townhouses shall not have the same siding color, and 3) two townhouses having full brick
facades shall not be adjacent.
2. Add sill courses below the second story windows on elevations facing Rt. 29.
3. Provide elevations for all townhouse blocks.
4. Revise the landscape plan to address the requirement for the 40' landscape buffer along the EC frontage of the
development and show how the buffer is coordinated with existing wooded area to remain and proposed frontage
improvements.
5. Resolve the tree and sewer lateral conflicts near units 47 and 109.
6. Coordinate the quantities of linden and abelia drawn on the plan with the quantities listed in the plant schedule.
Use a single symbol for the TCG plant.
7. Add 2 large shade trees, 2'h" caliper at planting, on both sides of Lewis & Clark Drive, (for a total of 4 trees)
within 400' of the Rt. 29 intersection.
8. Add 4'-6' evergreen trees in the mixed median planting.
9. Provide a landscape maintenance agreement for the median plants.
10. Shift the locations of the groups of Virginia pine and Sweetbay magnolia to coordinate with the retaining wall
location.
11. Demonstrate that all landscaping will be maintained by the HOA.
12. Revise the species of shrubs proposed along Lewis & Clark Drive to ones that can easily be acquired at 24"
planting height.
13. Confirm with Anchor block, and provide documentation, that 3' is sufficient spacing between large trees and the
retaining wall where geo-grid is used. Otherwise, increase planting area to accommodate the trees.
14. Revise the plan to show landscaping at the stormwater facility located at the south end of the project area
consistent with the previous approval.
Mr. Hancock seconded the motion.
The motion carried by a vote of 5:0.
Engineering —Matthew Wentland
1. A revised VSMP plan will need to be approved prior to final site plan approval. (Rev. 1) Response noted
2. Revised road plans will need to be approved prior to FSP approval. (Rev. 1) Response noted
3. All plans related to the Rt. 29 improvements will need to be approved prior to FSP approval. (Rev. 1)
Response noted
4. The public road/ROW has been shifted about 20' SW of previously shown locations and improvements are
shown on an adjacent parcel. Please provide an easement/BLA and verify that the connection to the rest of
North Pointe is still viable. An easement will be needed if the barricade is to be placed on the adjacent parcel.
(Rev. 1) Response noted
5. Private roads are shown as being designed to 15mph AASHTO standards and will need to be revised to meet
the minimum requirements of the Design Standards Manual for multifamily private streets (K crest is 5
minimum and K sag is 15 minimum). The alley should be designed to these standards as well. [14-412B, DSM]
(Rev. 1) The multifamily private road standards are not met, as they have a minimum easement
width of 30'. Please revise.
6. Trees are shown in the site distance easement for Aldrich Terrace at the intersection of Dillon Court. Please
include these on the sight distance profiles to verify they are not blocking the sight distance. (Rev. 1) Comment
addressed
7. Provide verification from FEMA that any changes from the approved CLOMR can be addressed later with the
LOMR. (Rev. 1) Comment withdrawn.
8. Show all SWM easements on the plans. Offsite easements will need to be recorded prior to VSMP approval.
The access to Facility A will also not work as shown with the 2:1 slopes. (Rev. 1) Comment addressed
9. Inlet and manhole structures should be located outside of the 50' grading easement leading to the adjacent
parcel. Landscaping should also be removed from the easement. It also appears that pipes 5, 35, and 59 should
be deeper to allow construction of a future road in the easement. A profile and rough design of a connector road
in the easement would be helpful to verify the storm and other utilities are shown deep enough. (Rev. 1)
Comment addressed
10. Show the extents of the geogrid behind the SWM Facility B retaining walls to ensure they are outside of the
grading easement. (Rev. 1) Comment addressed
Rev. 1 Additional Comments
11. Perpendicular spaces on 20' drive aisles will need to be a minimum of 10'xl8' [18.4.12.16c]
ACSA - Richard Nelson
Final Site Plan is currently under review. Comments were sent back to Collins November 9, 2018.
VDOT - Adam Moore
See attached review comments.
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Fload
Culpeper. Virginia 22701
December 20, 2018
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Christopher Perez
Re: North Pointe Northwest — Final Site Plan
SDP-2018-00045
Review #2
Dear Mr. Perez:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, revised 16
October 2018, and offers the following comments:
1. The Route 29 Improvements Plan (SUB201600196) for the entrance of this site, which
must be approved in conjunction with this plan, is currently under review.
2. Is the proposed guardrail along Lewis & Clark Drive warranted? This was not shown on
the initial site plan. Where retaining walls are needed along Lewis & Clark Drive they
should be designed so that the required clear zone is achieved, negating the need for
guardrail.
3. Please check sheet numbering, sheet numbers 7 & 8 are duplicated.
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