Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201800164 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2019-06-20COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 Project title: Project file number: Plan preparer: Owner or rep.: Date Received: Rev. 1 Received: Rev. 2 Received: Rev. 3 Received: Date of comments: Rev. 1 comments: Rev. 2 comments: Rev. 3 comments: Mr. Ledbetter, Road and Drainage plan review Old Trail Block 32 — Road Plans SUB201800164 Bill Ledbetter [bledbetter@roudabush.com] Dave Brockman [dave@oldtrailvillage.com] 10 Sept 2018 21 Dec 2018 28 March 2019 07 June 2019 23 Oct 2018 19 Feb 2019 23 May 2019 20 June 2019 This plan has been approved. See letter and attachments. Please provide 4 hard copies of the plan to be stamped. You can now also submit your request to establish a bond. Engineering (Emily Cox) 1. WPO must be approved before road plan can be approved. Rev. 1: WP0201800077 must be approved before this road plan can be approved. Please add this plan # to the cover sheet Note #2. Rev. 2: Comment still valid. Rev. 3: Comment addressed. 2. Provide a copy of permits relating to work in the floodplain. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 3. Provide permission or easement to grade offsite as shown on the plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 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. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Grading steeper than 2:1 is shown and note did not include steep slope seed mix option. Rev. 2: Please revise note to say low maintenance ground cover or steep slope grass seed mix. Crown Vetch is invasive and is not recommended by the county. Also, please add the same note on landscaping plan. Rev. 3: Comment addressed. 5. Note the approved steep slopes exhibit on the plan (date of approval and title of exhibit). Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 6. Label Sheet 13, grading plan, not utility plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 7. Ensure biofilter matches WPO Plan (grading and layout). Rev 1: Comment addressed. 8. Show stormwater management facility easements. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. SWM facility easement not evident. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 9. The typical section on sheets 20 & 21 for Raynor & Charnwood should say private, not public. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 10. Sight distance lines and easements should be unobstructed. SD#3(building), SD#2 (driveways/cars), and SD12(building) appear to have obstructions. Rev. 1: Objects are no longer Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 3 shown, so sight distance cannot properly be checked. Buildings were shown on the 1't submission. Rev. 2: Please check lot 40 and lot 8. Lot 40 does not show a building and lot 8 appears to have a line going through the corner of the building. Rev. 3: Comment addressed. 11. Maximum velocity in storm pipes is 15ft/s. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Pipes 19-9, 32-31 and 34-33 are still above 15 ft/s. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 12. Provide pavement design calculations (flexible pavement worksheet). Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 13. Is this plan going to be phased? If so, provide phase lines and outline of plan/sequence. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 14. Rev. 1: Clarify private road vs. alley. Private roads must have a minimum ROW width of 30 ft. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 15. Rev. 2: [Sheet 14] It is not clear where structures 8A and 9A are located. They are in the pipe and inlet computations. Please review all DA, calcs and pipe labels etc. to ensure consistency. Rev. 3: Comment addressed. 16. Rev. 2: Provide detail for driveway entrances. Rev. 3: Comment addressed. Planning (Andy Reitelbach) 1. See attached review comment letter dated Oct 23, 2018. Rev. 1: See attached comment letter dated Feb 15, 2019. Rev. 2:See attached letter dated May 23, 2019. Rev. 3:Approved. See attached email dated 6/20/19. VDOT (Adam Moore) t . See attached review comment letter dated Oct 23, 2018. Rev. 1: See attached comment letter dated Feb 19, 2019. Rev. 2: See attached letter dated May 10, 2019. Rev. 3: approved. See attached email dated 6/14/19. 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. Rev. 1: 1. Please verify via email that this Block 32 will be marked no parking throughout due to street and alley widths. Fire Rescue has no objections to the road plan as submitted as long as the no parking is verified. Rev. 2: The response letter indicates that the road is 26' FC to FC which will allow parking and 20' of clear travel lane. Based on standard parking space dimensions the road width would need to be 28' FC to FC to allow parking on one side of the street. SNM rev. 3: Approved. See attached email dated 6/11/19. ACSA (Richard Nelson) 1. Still under review, see attached email. Rev. 1: Still under review. See email dated 2/19/19. Rev. 2: No objection per email dated 4/11/19. GIS (Andrew Slack) 1. The road names are acceptable, but our office recommends against using 'Bishopgate Lane Ext' due to 'Bishopgate Lane' being a loop. This could lead to confusion by emergency responders in the field. We recommend changing the name of 'Bishopgate Lane Ext.' to a different name. For example 'Bishopgate Place', 'Bishopgate Way', or 'Bishopgate Drive' would be examples of road names that are available Rev. 3: Approved. See email attached dated 6/14/19. 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 Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 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. 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 From: Andy Reitelbach Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 4:20 PM To: Emily Cox Subject: FW: Old Trail Block 32 Road Plans Attachments: - - - - f; - - - RP-6 SITE2.pdf; 8053-OLD TRAIL - Block 32 - RP-5 SITE1.pdf Good afternoon Emily, It appears that all of my comments regarding these road plans have been addressed. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andy Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development Department 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 areitelbach@albemarle.org 434.296.5832 x3261 From: Jeremy Fox <JFox@roudabush.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 9:06 AM To: Andy Reitelbach <mreitelbach@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Old Trail Block 32 Final Subdivision Plat Please see attached revisions showing CG-12's connecting to the sidewalk, tree relocated off of CG-12, and note referencing sidewalk and planting strip on the fire access road omitted. Please let Emily know if revisions are satisfactory at your convenience. Thanks, - J Fox Roudabush, Gale & Assoc., Inc. From: Jeremy Fox Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2019 7:26 PM To: Andy Reitelbach <mreitelbach@albemarle.org> Subject: Re: Old Trail Block 32 Final Subdivision Plat Emily Cox From: Deel, Justin <justin.deel@vdot.virginia.gov> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2019 9:07 AM To: Jeremy Fox Cc: Adam Moore; Emily Cox Subject: Re: Planning Application Review for SUB201800164 OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, BLOCK 32 - ROAD PLANS . Emily, Jeremy, It appears that our remaining comments have been addressed based on this latest plan revision. Justin Justin Deel, P.E. VDOT - Charlottesville 434-422-9894 540-717-1408 (c) On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 10:18 AM Jeremy Fox <JFox@roudabush.com> wrote: Justin/Adam, Please see below responses in red to most recent VDOT comments and below link to requested revisions for 32 road plans (PDF). I believe all parties indicated pdf review would suffice. Please let Emily Cox know when revisions are found satisfactory. VDOT (Adam Moore) 1. Please remove stop bars at internal intersections, as they are not warranted and will not be maintained. • Stop bars have been removed as requested. 2. Please show CG-12s angled perpendicular to the crossing street, not perpendicular to the center of the radius. • CG-12's have been shifted to be perpendicular to the crossing street as requested. 1 GOOGLE DRIVE: https://drive.google.com/file/d/lmXzTXRKipVw3AHEnw7xRPTT-xlxRO KJ/view?usp=sharing Thank you, Jeremy L. Fox Roudabush, Gale & Assoc., Inc. I Engineering 172 South Pantops Drive Suite A Charlottesville, VA 22911 Office: (434) 979-8121 Direct: (434) 956-4418 www.roudabush.com From: Shawn Maddox Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 1:58 PM To: Dave Brockman; Emily Cox Cc: Bill Ledbetter; Jeremy Fox Subject: RE: Block 32 - need final determination Mr. Brockman — thank you for your call earlier today. After looking at my notes and past reviews of the road plans it appears my concerns about the lack of 20' of clear travel width was noted on 1/29/2019 and 4/17/2019 in addition to the comments with this most recent resubmittal so this not a new, nor 11tn hour comment as stated. Both of those plan review comments indicated the need for the area to be marked no parking due to the lack of 20' of clear travel width. With that being said you made valid points and I am willing to withdraw my objection for Block 32, (this travel width will not be considered in future submittals for other projects), with the road width as designed. This decision is made based on the following supporting evidence: 1. Interconnected streets that meet fire code minimum standards. 2. A second point of access for emergency services. 3. Building heights no more than two stories 4. Reduced on street parking due to driveways, site distances, etc. 5. The differences in VDOT, County and Fire code standards for street parking dimensions. Fire Rescue does not request, or support, the idea for roll top curb in this section, please just proceed as proposed. Thank you for reaching out to me. Shawn From: Dave Brockman <dave@oldtrailvillage.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 9:35 AM To: Shawn Maddox <smaddox@albemarle.org>; info@acfirerescue.org Cc: Bill Ledbetter <BLedbetter@roudabush.com>; Jeremy Fox <JFox@roudabush.com> Subject: Block 32 - need final determination Hi Shawn, I hope you are doing well. I'm in complete desperation now and reaching out for your final approval to our plans on block 32. We have had about 9 months of multiple reviews on the Block 32 development plans from Fire and Rescue, and now at the 12th hour we are dealing with one last issue that we feel has been addressed. If you are incapable of making this final approval then please forward to an appropriate person that can respond to our numerous requests. I just need you to realize this hold up is going to be causing extreme economic hardship if we don't receive approval ASAP. Can you please get back to me, Bill Ledbetter, Jeremy Fox or anyone at County Engineering to approve the plans as soon as possible? If there is another issue you have with Old Trail Village then please let me know as soon as possible. We've all left several messages with ways to contact us and you can follow up with anyone to express your concerns. I greatly appreciate this. Dave Brockman Executive Vice President Development March Mountain Properties From: Jeremy Fox <JFox@roudabush.com> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2019 4:34 PM To: Emily Cox Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SUB201800164 OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, BLOCK 32 - ROAD PLANS. FYI, Andrew (GIS) is good - J Fox Roudabush, Gale & Assoc., Inc. From: Andrew Slack [mailto:aslack@albemarle.org] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2019 4:32 PM To: Jeremy Fox <JFox@roudabush.com> Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SUB201800164 OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, BLOCK 32 - ROAD PLANS. Jeremy, That will be perfect. Thanks for getting back to me about the road name. Have a nice weekend. Andy Slack GIS Specialist Albemarle County Community Development Information Services — GDS 434-296-5832 ext. 3384 aslack(aalbemarle.org www.albemarle.org From: Jeremy Fox <JFox@roudabush.com> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2019 3:18 PM To: Andrew Slack <aslack@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SUB201800164 OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, BLOCK 32 - ROAD PLANS. Hey Andrew, Just checking in to see if you're ok with changing the road name to "Bishopgate Place" as suggested in your comment. You and Andy (planning) are the only ones pending road plan approval. Thanks, - J Fox Roudabush, Gale & Assoc., Inc. From: Jeremy Fox Sent: Friday, June 07, 2019 10:21 AM To: 'aslack@albemarle.org' <aslacl<@albemarle.org> Cc: 'Emily Cox' <ecox2@albemarle.org> Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SUB201800164 OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, BLOCK 32 - ROAD PLANS. Andrew, Please see below responses in red to most recent GIS comments and below link to requested revisions for 32 road plans (PDF). I believe all parties indicated pdf review would suffice. Please let Emily Cox know when revisions are found satisfactory. GIS (Andrew Slack) 1. The road names are acceptable, but our office recommends against using'Bishopgate Lane Ext' due to'Bishopgate Lane' being a loop. This could lead to confusion by emergency responders in the field. We recommend changing the name of 'Bishopgate Lane Ext.' to a different name. For example 'Bishopgate Place', 'Bishopgate Way', or 'Bishopgate Drive' would be examples of road names that are available • The road name will be changed to "Bishopgate Place" upon private road approval from planning during the second phase of the final subdivision plat. GOOGLE DRIVE: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mXzTXRK4pVw3AHEnw7xRPTT-xlxRO KJ/view?usp=sharing Thank you, Jeremy L. Fox Roudabush, Gale & Assoc., Inc. I Engineering 172 South Pantops Drive Suite A Charlottesville, VA 22911 Office: (434) 979-8121 Direct: (434) 956-44i8 www.roudabush.com