HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB202000071 Review Comments Final Plat 2020-12-23� AI
?"h
�IRGRTF
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Final Plat review
Project:
Berkmar Overlook Subdivision Plat
Project Tile number:
SUB2020-00071
Plat preparer:
Brian D. Jamison, LS — Roudabush, Gale, & Assoc., Inc. / Engineering
172 South Pantops Drive, Suite A, Charlottesville, VA 22911
( biamison(a),roudabush.coml
Owner or rep.:
Berkmar Development, LLC / 2496 Old Ivy Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903
Plan received date:
29 Apr 2020
(Rev. 1)
30 Nov 2020
Date of comments:
13 Jun 2020
(Rev. 1)
23 Dec. 2020
Reviewer:
John Anderson
Project Coordinator: Paty Saternye
Engineering has reviewed the final plat and offers the following comments.
Note: If text grayscale, then comment is either addressed or withdrawn.
V2
1. Unclear how this plat may be approved without simultaneously extinguishing (graphically) boundary lines
of existing parcels held by Berkmar Development, LLC (TMP 45-85, 45-84A, 45-112F1, 45-112172). Note,
for example, Open Space D and A cross Ex. boundaries, which may introduce uncertainty concerning
assignment to residue parcells once development is subdivided. Engineering defers to Planning. (Rev. 1)
Partially addressed. As follow-up: Notes concerning existing SWM and PD easement are helpful.
Provide deed bk.-pg. ref for existing SWM and public drainage easements to be vacated by this plat.
2. In addition to IF@104,33' label, provide bearing and distance labels for 104,33' boundary line segment.
3. Provide 481.60'(T) label for line segments bearing N70°26'0I—W.
V3
4. It seems unusual that fenced cemeteries might count as `open space.' Engineering defers to Planning.
(Rev. 1) Withdrawn. Applicant response (11/30/20 letter): `Cemetery is located within an `open space'
parcel.'
5. Please use a different arc endpoint symbol to distinguish from line segment endpoints. For example,
164.02' segment traverses lots 37-41 with 0.34' and 12.60' lengths extending across portions of adjacent
lots, while at the other end of this row of lots (N end Swede Street), C6 may or may not define boundaries
of Lots 31 to 34. Avoid a single symbol that in one instance may indicate a line endpoint, while in another,
an arc endpoint. Different symbols may help a great deal. Additional comments, V4-V6, are possible.
V4
6. Recommend parenthetical (T) distance for arcs spanning multiple lot boundaries: C14, 16, 19, 25 (W), for
example.
7. Provide bearings for Emergency Access Parcel segments measuring 60.53' and 64.93'. (Rev. 1) NA.
Applicant: `No longer relevant.'
8. V5: Provide inset detail for 0.34' tie, Lot 36.
V7
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 3
9. Provide deed bk.-pg. reference to recorded third -party Retaining Wall Maintenance Agreements, unless
Agreements are to be recorded with this final plat. Engineering defers to Planning, but needs to confirm
that Agreements for walls crossing parcel boundaries are recorded. Wall easements are not dedicated to
public use. Albemarle is not party to retaining wall maintenance agreements. (Rev. 1) Appears to persist.
Applicant: `Separate cover.' As follow- Please submit, unless overlooked.
10. Recommend revise New Public Utility Easement labels which appear to apply to both ACSA sanitary and
waterline easements with conventional labels reading ACSA Sanitary Easement, and ACSA Waterline
easement. Distinct ACSA labels are informative to agencies and property owners relative to lots,
boundaries, type of utility, and location of utility types, relative to one another. Engineering defers to
Planning /ACSA, but finds proposed new public utility easement labels to be generic, non -descriptive, and
for this reason, of minimal use. (Rev. 1) Withdrawn. Plat does not appear to distinguish between
waterline and sanitary sewer easements, apparently not recognizing value of descriptive utility easements.
As follow-up: Please examine location of points on arc bordering Open Space F. Please compare images,
V4 and V7 below, since point locations inconsistent, and the meaning is somewhat unclear.
V4 V7
ON saeca r % 'v OPEN SPACE 1
osNi
re ec w/ v �!"
q�
-,0.216 AC
2 N5536'20'W/
18.10'
142717'27l
2 (11E1 2 10.68, c
Ai'l 10.33'J ",� \%. /
11. Revise /relocate 54.41' tie at E end of wall and maintenance easement crossing Lots 24-28 such that tie is
between a property or parcel boundary and a corner of the wall easement (one end or other of 18.00' line
segment), similar to 45.50' tie provided for wall easement crossing Lots 22 and 23.
12. If wall and maintenance easement crosses any portion of Lot 28, provide inset detail for that portion of the
wall easement that lies on Lot 28.
13. Provide landscape easement endpoints for 36.18' and 39.98' segments crossing lots 15 -17.
14. Provide inset detail for portion of new variable width landscape maintenance easement that lies on Lot 15.
15. Provide endpoints for new public utility easement line segments on Lot 47,
16. Check variable width sight distance easement in Open Space B, which has a line break south of Lot 31. It
is unclear why a sight distance easement would break. (Rev. 1) Withdrawn. Applicant: `There are two
separate intersections that have overlapping sight distance easements. One through access easement from
TMP 45-112F and one from Swede Street and Empire Street intersection.'
17. Revise 22.45' tie (new public utility easements), Marsar ul-de-sac, to tie to lot, open space, or emergency
access parcel boundaries, not to one another. (Rev. 1) Withdrawn /review error.
V8
18. Copy V7 SWM easement line and curve labels to V8 such that sheet V8 defines the SWM easement with
certainty. Engineering understands the intent is not to overwhelm any single sheet of the plat with too
much data, but believes that will not be the case with the SWM easement. (Rev. 1) Partially addressed.
Applicant: `I want to separate so that it is clear what is being displayed.' As follow-up: Clarify if possible
that two length values (highlight, below) define distance to center (17.26' line segment endpoint) of new
10' private drainage easement. Slight ambiguity, please see image, below.
19
20.
21.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 3
ARRKMAR DRIVE
Provide SWM easement endpoints between 88.49' and 85.96' line segments, west edge of easement. (Rev.
1) Partially addressed. Please seefollow- request, item 18 above.
New 10' private drainage easements (multiple): Provide line segment endpoints, all easements.
Ensure plat defines Aabels SWM facility access easement. If access is included in SWM easement on V8,
please confirm. (Rev. 1) Partially addressed. Proposed New Public Drainage, SWM, Access Easement
(image, above) is consistent with the road plan. Separate deeds, however, cover public drainage and public
SWM /Access easement. As ollow-up: Please provide linework to separate /distinguish which is which:
SWM vs. PD easement.
22. Label unlabeled private drainage easements—`Typ' label appears slightly inadequate.
23. Provide Note on V7 and V8 that reads: `Reference bearing - distance information on sheets V4, V5, V6.'
24. New: Please revise Note 3 sheet VI to ref. date May 16, 2016, since code 18-30.3.2 references this date.
Please feel free to call if any questions: 434.296-5832-x3069.
Thank you
SUB202000071 Berkmar Overlook FPT 122320revI