HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB202000098 Correspondence 2020-10-19 (5)SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Focused Engineering
October 13, 2020
Tori Kanellopoulos
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
RE: Response Letter #2 for SLTB202000098 Galaxie Farm Road Plan — Planning
Dear Tori,
Thank you for your review of the Road Plans for Galaxie Farm Subdivision. This letter contains
responses to County comments dated September 24, 2020. Our responses are as follows:
1. Addressed.
2. Addressed.
3. ZMA201800012 Application Plan. Label the bike lanes on Roads Al and A2.
a. REV 1: Not addressed. Labels do not appear to be shown.
Bike lanes now labeled. That layer had been turned off in the CAD rile.
4. [Comment] Label roads as 'publicor ''private" on the road plan.
a. REV 1: Partially addressed. Road E needs to be a "private street easement".
"Street" verbiage added instead of "Access"
5. Addressed.
6. Addressed.
7. Addressed.
8. [14-41 0] Street standards. Include labels and dimensions for sidewalks and planting strips.
a. REV l: Not addressed. These should be labeled on C5 and C6.
This info was on the same hidden layer as the Bike Lane labels, and is now shown.
9. [Comment] Offsite grading outside the ROW appears to be shown on TMP 91-813. if this is the case,
an offsite grading easement is needed (or letter of approval).
a. REV 1: Acknowledged applicant response. Applicant is working on addressing this comment.
Ensure all offsite permission is obtained. It appears work is also shown on TMP 91A1-EO to connect
to for emergency access.
Noted, we are working with County attorney Andy Herrick on the Parcel 8B grading easement
and with Avinity Subdivision representatives on the Parcel EO emergency access connection
approval.
10. [Comment] Recommend include the required trail with the Road Plan, as this must be built or bonded
prior to final site plan approval. If not included with the Road Plan, it will need to be bonded
separately (or built).
REV 1: Partially addressed. The trail connection along Road Al to the sidewalk is not shown (see
application plan below). Also note that a small portion of the trail is shown offsite on Sheet C4.
912 E. High Sr. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
Additionally, Sheets C5 and C7 should show the trail all the way to the boundary line — the boundary
line is not fully visible at the bottom of the page.
This trail connection is now provided. Since Cow Branch only has a flow depth of 311, a
pedestrian ford crossing at this location is appropriate. Inset plan showing this corner of the
property added to sheets C5 & C7.
11. Addressed.
12. Addressed.
13. Addressed.
14. 18-32.7.9.5 Street trees.
a. Addressed.
b. Addressed.
c. If possible, provide street trees at 50' apart along southern edge of Road C cul-de-sac. Several
trees are 60-70'+ apart.
REV 1: Partially addressed. It appears an additional tree could
be added adjacent to Lot 3.
Additional tree added to Lot 3.
Cl. Addressed.
e. Several street trees are conflicting with utilities along Road C (storm sewer).
i. REV 1: Not fully addressed. See trees below Open Space C, Lot 52, Lot 10, Lot 11, Lot 12, and
Lot 46.
These trees will remain in their current location. The rationale is that since the high-
performance polypropylene storm pipe has watertight, double-gasketed joints, these will
not attract tree roots, and will be fully resistant to the load of medium trees. Thus, the trees
do not present a longevity concern for the storm sewer. And since the storm sewer should
have a very long service life (minimum design service life of 100 years), the cost of tree
replacement when these trees are removed for sewer rehab will be negligible. In fact, the
trees will likely have died and been replaced several times before the pipes need
replacement. Also the depth of the storm sewer ensures no compromise of the health of the
trees. So there is no functional need to move the current landscaping or utility locations.
The public benefit of keeping street trees as anticipated in public ROW outweighs
arguments against moving them into private yards.
ii. REV 1: Recommend move trees into Open Space C and out of planting strip along Road C, to
avoid conflict with pipe.
Appreciate the recommendation, but as was argued above, there is no need for this
relocation.
in. REV 1: Along Lots 9-12, seek alternative utility layout or find alternative tree placement, such
as in yards.
As was argued above, there is no need for this relocation.
iv. REV 1: Ensure tree counts are updated accordingly.
A few trees were added to satisfy APB and planning comments, counts have been updated.
f. REV 1 new: Note that all trees shown on individual lots will need landscaping easements. Label
landscape easements on the road plan, to allow for future comparison with the final site plan. See
Lots 62, 63, 53-60, 49. 48.
Noted, only one additional easement was needed near Lot 62.
15. Addressed.
16. Addressed.
912 E. High St.. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.51401 shlmp-engineenrig.rom
Advisory Comments
1. Advisory comment. Planning review of this Road Plan is for comments specific to Road Plan
requirements only. Planning approval of the Road Plan does not constitute subdivision plat or site
plan approval; Planning has not reviewed this Road Plan for other requirements such as setbacks,
minimum lot size, open space, etc.
Noted — thank you.
2. Advisory comment. The final plat will need to meet the requirements of 14-235 and will need a
maintenance agreement meeting the requirements of 14-317.
Noted — thank you.
3. Advisory comment. Note that all required improvements must be built or bonded per 14-234 and 14-
235 prior to final plat approval.
Noted — thank you.
If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions, please feel free to contact me at
keane@shimp-en ing eering com or by phone at 434-227-5140.
Regards,
Keane Rucker, EIT
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
912 E. High St.. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.51401 shlmp-engineenrig.rom