HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201900071 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2019-06-10COUNTY 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: Pleasant Green Connector Road Plan
Project file number: SUB201900071
Plan preparer: Collins Engineering [scott@collins-engineering.com]
Owner or rep.: SM Charlottesville, LLC
Stanley Martin Homes
Date Received: 06 May 2019
Date of comments: 10 June 2019
Scott,
We have reviewed the above referenced plans and have the following comments:
Engineering (Emily Cox)
1. Professional seal should be signed and dated.
2. WPO has been approved, however this plan must comply. Was culvert 1 part of the WPO Plan? It
appears to be a concentrated outfall which was not considered?
3. Culvert 1 should be analyzed for the 25-year storm since it is an emergency access road.
4. There appears to be a private road off of Farmhouse Road that has no profile or typical section.
Please clarify.
5. Provide horizonal curve information (start point, end points, radii).
6. Any pavement markings should be labeled and dimensioned.
Planning (Daniel Butch)
1. Provide pedestrian crosswalk crossing Farmhouse Rd near Alston St crosswalk. Cconnect sidewalk
from Farmhouse Rd to sidewalk in parking area of recreation field/clubhouse; provide crosswalk
connecting the sidewalk on Farmhouse Rd crossing the driveway to parking lot for recreational
field/club house area.
2. Additionally, provide pedestrian path connecting to recreational area from both parking lot and
from Farmhouse Rd.
Planning (Megan Nedostup)
1. See attached comment letter dated 5/28/19.
VDOT (Adam Moore)
1. See attached comment letter dated 06/06/19.
Fire Rescue (Shawn Maddox)
1. No objection.
ACSA (Richard Nelson)
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
1. Currently under review per email dated 6/5/19.
GIS (Andrew Slack)
1. The proposed road name `FARMHOUSE RD' is not acceptable, as are already 5 road names that
begin with the word `FARM' in the County.
Per Part I, Section 4-a of the County's Road Naming and Property Numbering Manual (page 6 of
PDF):
"A proposed road name which duplicates an existing or reserved road name in Albemarle County
or the City of Charlottesville shall not be approved. An exception may be made for cul-de-sacs
which have the same name as the road from which they originate (example: "Amberfield Court"
which originates from "Amberfield Drive")."
2. The applicant should name the road `MCCOMB ST' per Part I, Section 4-k of the County's Road
Naming and Property Numbering Manual (page 6 of the PDF):
"Where a proposed road is a continuation of or in alignment with an approved road, it shall utilize
the same road name as the approved road. A new road name shall be required if the proposed road
is disconnected from the existing road by an offset greater than sixty (60) feet."
3. A PDF version of the Ordinance and Manual can be found here:
https://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms_Center/Departments/Geographic_Data_Services/
Forms/Road Naming_and_Property Numbering_Ordinance_and Manual.pdf
4. Parcel and mapping information can be found here: http://gisweb.albemarle.org/
5. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
ARB (Heather McMahon)
1. No objection.
Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to
discuss this review.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me either by email (ecox2@albemarle.org) or by
phone at 434-296-5832 ext. 3565.
Sincerely,
Emily Cox, P.E.
Civil Engineer II
r� 'AL
� IRGS?at�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:
Emily Cox
From:
Megan Nedostup- Principal Planner
Division:
Planning Services
Date:
May 28, 2019
Subject:
SUB2019-071 Pleasant Green- Phase 1 Road Plans
1. Sidewalks and street trees should be bonded with the road plans.
2. Is there a reason why the proposed private alley does not connect to Alston Street?
3. As commented on during the initial site plan (SDP2018-068): "Will the alley need to be a
road for frontage purposes for Phase 2 of this development? If so, this alley should be a
public private road and will need to meet all the requirements including sidewalks,
street trees, etc. If it will be a private road, a justification will be required under 14-233.
In addition, the lots will be double frontage lots and need to include screening as
required."
4. Any parking and landscaping related to parking should be removed from the road plans,
including landscaping within the open space areas. The road plan landscaping should
just include landscaping related to the right of way/street trees. The required
landscaping outside of the right of way will be reviewed and approved with the site
plan. Revised the landscape plans and plant list accordingly.
5. Any required street tree landscaping that is not within the right of way will be required
to be in an easement that will need to include a deed for maintenance.
6. Any notes outside of those required for the road plans should be removed from the
road plans. For example, density and parking requirements are not needed for road plan
approval.
Please contact Megan Nedostup at the Department of Community Development 296-5832 ext.
3004 for further information.
1
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper Virginia 22701
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
June 6, 2019
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Emily Cox, P.E.
Re: Pleasant Green Phase 1 — Road Plan
SUB-2019-00071
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 Collins Engineering, dated 3
May 2019, and offers the following comments:
1. Notes on the plans reference proposed "VDOT Standard Mini Roundabout", please
clarify.
2. Please refer to the NCHRP Report 672, as well as the FHWA document "Roundabout:
An Informational Guide" for roundabout design guidance.
3. Roundabout size should be determined by Sidra Intersection and auto -turn analyses.
Provide that analysis, including fastest path diagrams.
4. There does not appear to be enough deflection at the approaches to reduce the vehicle
speed entering the roundabout.
5. Please see attached roundabout sight distance guidance document and provide all
referenced sight distance scenarios within roundabout on plans.
6. Required signage for roundabouts include the outside yield sign and the right chevron
sign in the center island at each approach.
7. The intersection of Farmhouse Road, Blue Ridge Avenue, and McComb Street should be
a T-intersection.
8. Provide ROW for turnaround at intersection of Dupree Street and private alley.
9. Why does the typical section of Farmhouse Road remain consistent throughout when
there are areas of parking on one side only and areas of no parking? Parking areas should
be established with a bumpout.
10. Please remove parking pavement markings and hatching as they will not be maintained.
Signage should be used to establish areas of no parking vs parking.
11. Street trees cannot be within 30 feet of curb radii at intersections.
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
June 6, 2019
Emily Cox, P.E.
Page 2
PIease provide two copies 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,
1L Lit L- A aZv
Adam J. Moo , P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide
Exhibit 6-SS
Stopping Sight Distance
on the Approach
Exhibit 6-56
Stopping Sight Distance
on Circulatory Roadway
Exhibit 6-57
Sight Distance to
Crosswalk on Exit
LEGEND
d Stopping eight distance /
related to approaching speed
LEGEND
of Distance related to stopping
sight distace and circulatory
speed
1
p�\
.x
}
1►L1, ill!!
Page 6-62
r'.nnvrinht Nntinnal Ararlamv of Cripnrp¢ All rinhtS racamarl
Chapter 6/Geometric Design
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide
6.7.3.2 Intersection Sight Distance
Intersection sight distance is the distance required for a driver without the right-
of-way to perceive and react to the presence of conflicting vehicles. Intersection sight
distance is achieved through the establishment of sight triangles that allow a driver to
see and safely react to potentially conflicting vehicles. At roundabouts, the only loca-
tions requiring evaluation of intersection sight distance are the entries.
Intersection sight distance is traditionally measured through the determination
of a sight triangle. This triangle is bounded by a length of roadway defining a limit
away from the intersection on each of the two conflicting approaches and by a line
connecting those two limits. For roundabouts, these legs should be assumed to fol-
low the curvature of the roadway, and thus distances should be measured not as
straight lines but as distances along the vehicular path.
Intersection sight distance should be measured using an assumed height of
driver's eye of 3.5 ft (1,080 mm) and an assumed height of object of 3.5 ft (1,080 mm)
in accordance with the AASHTO "Green Book" (4) which is based upon NCHRP
Report 383: Intersection Sight Distances (20).
Exhibit 6-58 presents a diagram showing the method for determining inter-
section sight distance. As can be seen in the exhibit, the sight distance triangle has
two conflicting approaches that must be checked independently. The following
two subsections discuss the calculation of the length of each of the approaching
sight limits.
LEGEND
d, Entering stream distance
dp Circulating stream distance
I,
50 R (f5 ng
6.7.3.3 Length of Approach Leg of Sight Triangle
The length of the approach leg of the sight triangle should be limited to 50 ft
(15 m). British research on sight distance has determined that excessive intersection
sight distance results in a higher frequency of crashes. This value, consistent with
British and French practice, is intended to require vehicles to slow down prior to
entering the roundabout, which supports the need to slow down and yield at the
roundabout entry and allows drivers to focus on the pedestrian crossing prior to
Entries to mundaboufS
require adequate lntersecdon
sight distance.
Exhibit 6-58
Intersection Slght Distance
Chapter 6/Geometric Design
Page 6-63
rnnvrinht IUatinnal Arariamv of grianrac all rinhte racanrari