HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202000042 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2021-04-26County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434-296-5832 Fax 434-972-4126
Memorandum
To: Scott Collins
From: Paty Saternye, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: June 23, 2020
Rev. 1: November 19, 2020
Rev. 2: January 20, 2021
Rev. 3: April 26, 2021
Subiect: SDP202000042 Berkmar Overlook - 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.]
Comments from the Initial Site Plan review that apply to the site plan:
11. [32.5.2(i) & (n)] Address the following:
b) Provide a second road sections for those portions of the road that include parking on one side.
Ensure that the parking is shown properly and that the remaining drive aisles meet the minimum
requirements for VDOT, Engineering and Fire Rescue.
Final: Comment not yet fully addressed. Although the comment for Swede Street has been
addressed changes to the section for Empire Street and Marsac Street have been made and no
longer meet the minimum requirements. Address the following change for changes in parking on
the 2nd submission:
ii. Provide a street section for the portions of Empire Street and Swede Street where parallel
parking has been added and ensure this section meets all minimums.
Rev. 1: Comments not yet fully addressed. Revised the street section stationing chart to
include accurate information for Swede Street. Address the following:
d. Ensure the portion of the ROW along the park, ...
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed....
Rev. 3: Comment not vet fully addressed. Since the subdivision will take place
after the final site plan approval remove the "D.B. PG. " portion of the
proposed street labels on all sheet since the ROWs will not have been
subdivided.
i) The internal road crosswalks are not supported by VDOT but should be included to meet County
requirements. Therefore, the HOA must maintain the crosswalks within the public road right of
way. Ensure that that is included in the HOA legal documents that must be submitted for County
review.
Final: Comment not yet addressed. ...
Rev. 3: Comment not yet fully addressed. The HOA documents have not vet been submitted for
review. Ensure that that is included in the HOA leoal documents that must be submitted for Countv
review
19. [32.5.20), 32.5.2(k) & 14-302(A)(5)] Existing and proposed sewer and drainage facilities. Address the
following:
d) Rev. 1: [New Commentl No maintenance easement for that walls appears to have been included in
the site plan. Address the following:
ii. Ensure that this easement is added on the next submission of the subdivision plat.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet addressed. The wall maintenance easement within lot 43 is not yet
shown on the submitted plat. Ensure that this easement is added on the next submission of
the subdivision plat.
Rev. 3: Comment not vet fully addressed. The wall maintenance easement within lot 43 is
not vet shown on the site plan. Show it, and label it, on the final site plan.
21 [Comment] Provide a copy of all exiting off -site easements from off -site property owners or submit
proposed off -site easement plat for review. Any proposed required easements, and their legal
documents, must be submitted separately from the initial site plan, reviewed, approved, and recorded
prior to the initial site plan approval.
Final: Comment not yet addressed. Address the following:
a) There are proposed offsite improvements, ...
Rev. 2: Comment not yet addressed. Address the following:...
Rev. 3: Comment not vet fully addressed. An agreement with the Foundation Child Development
Center had been previously been created and signed by all parties, without review by the County.
Once that document was submitted to the County comments were provided on 3/26/2021. A new
document was drafted and submitted on 3/30/2021, however that revised document did not
address all of the comment that had been specified. An email was sent to Andrew Baldwin on
3/31/2021 specifying the comments that had not vet been addressed. The following comments
must still be addressed prior to the planning department being able to allow this agreement to be
utilized in place of an offsite temporary construction and grading agreement. Address the
following:
i. Although the reference to 8/31 /20 site plan (which did not show all of the proposed changes)
is no longer included in the agreement no reference to which version of the final site plan has
been added back in its place. Reference to a version of the site plan that includes all
proposed changes to the adjoining parcel must be included. This is true both in the first
paragraph and the last paragraph of the agreement.
ii. The "attached exhibit' mentioned in the agreement must be attached to the version of the
document that is provided to the County. Only the 111 page, and not the attached exhibit, was
included in what you sent to John A. on 3/30/2021. Submit to the planning reviewer the full
document that the signers of the agreement were or will be provided.
b) Any required legal documents for offsite easements must be submitted and if not yet recorded then
reviewed, approved, and recorded prior to the final site plan approval.
Rev. 1: Comments not yet addressed....
plats. Address the following:
i. There appears to be a new ACSA Sewer realignment on TMP 45-112E & 45-112 shown
as proposed on site plan for first time and not shown on the easement plat currently under
review. Please provide proposed plat where this easement is being created or add it to the
easement plat already under review. This change will require ACSA review and therefore
ACSA comments are now pending.
ii. There are ACSA Sewer and Public Utility easements across Berkmar (in TMP 45-112,
TMP 45-112C, TMP 45-112E, TMP 45-112G) that are still labeled as "proposed".
1) If those easements have already been recorded, then revise the labels to provide the
recordation information and specify them as "existing'.
2) If any of these easements are have not vet been recorded then:
a. Add blanks for the deed book and page number information once recorded and
b. Ensure that the easements are added to the easement plat already under review or
submit a new easement plat creating them which must be submitted for review,
approval, and recordation prior to the approval of this site plan.
25. [4.7(d), 14-303(G) & 14-317] An instrument assuring the perpetual maintenance of the open space
areas, and any other improvements that are to be maintained by the HOA in perpetuity require County
Attorney approval prior to final site plan approval.
Final: Comment not yet addressed. ...
Rev. 3: Comment not vet fully addressed. Submit the instrument for review. A "Declaration of
Covenants, conditions and restrictions for Berkmar Overlook" was submitted on 4/22/2021 and will be
reviewed. It will be evaluated for whether it assures the perpetual maintenance of the open space
areas, and any other improvements that are to be maintained by the HOA in perpetuity and it must be
approved and recorded prior to final site plan approval.
28. [Comment] See the other SRC reviewer comments attached. All SRC reviewer comments must be
sufficiently address prior to final site plan approval.
Final: Comment not yet fully addressed....
Rev. 3: Comment not yet fully addressed. Engineering comments have been attached. RWSA and
ACSA comments are pending. Both will be forwarded to you once they have been received.
29. [32.7.9.5, 32.7.9.3 & 32.7.9.4] Provide street trees along Berkmar Drive and Woodburn Road. Street
trees are required along all existing and proposed streets. No trees are shown along Berkmar Drive.
Woodburn Road is shown to have tree preservation areas. However, the majority of the tree
preservation area along the road is also within an overhead easement. Also, it appears that most if not
all of the trees along Woodburn Road may either be within the easement, may not be healthy, or may
not be correct type of trees for street trees. Provide all required information for existing trees utilized to
meet landscaping requirements.
Final: Comment not yet fully addressed. Address the following:
b) Ensure that all trees not in the ROW or in HOA owned open space have a landscaping ...
Rev. 1: Comments not yet fully addressed....
easement within individual lots.
30. [32.7.9.5 & 32.7.9.4(c)] Provide street trees at the required spacing and of the correct type along all
streets. In addition to the comment above, ensure that the correct type of trees (large shade trees) are
included in the landscape plan and at the correct quantity based upon the spacing requirements.
Large shade trees are required at 50 feet on center for the full length of all existing and proposed
roads. If VDOT requirements and/or utilities restrict specific areas of the road frontage the same
number of street trees are required but they can be spaced closer together and/or when necessary,
and with approval, placed within landscape easements within the individual development parcels.
Final: Comment not yet fully addressed. ...
Rev. 1: Comments not yet addressed. ...
Rev. 3: Comment not yet fully addressed. For perpetual maintenance of the trees will be reauired
to be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded prior to final site plan approval for all trees
outside of the public right-of-way and within development lots.
31. [32.5.2 (e), (n) 32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4 (c)] Address the following:
g) Ensure that the street trees shown will be allowed. If not, show that alternative locations are
provided either within or outside of the right-of-way. If the trees will be outside of the right-of-way
landscaping easements will be required with ownership and perpetual maintenance of the
easements and landscaping put in place prior to the final site plan approval.
Final: Comment not yet fully addressed....
Rev. 3: Comment not yet fully addressed. The easements for the trees outside of the right-of-
way has been submitted and is under review. These easements should be included in the HOA
agreement, which must be approved, and a signed and notarized copy provided to the reviewer
prior to the final site plan approval.
Comments from the Final Site Plan review:
3T [Comment] Instruments assuring the perpetual maintenance of the stormwater management facility,
drainage easements, open space areas, landscaping and any other improvements that are to be
maintained by the FICA in perpetuity must be submitted, reviewed, approved, and signed versions of
the documents must be provided prior to the final site plan approval.
Rev. 1: Comments not yet addressed. ...
Rev. 3: Comment not vet fully addressed. Instruments assuring the perpetual maintenance of the
stormwater management facility, drainage easements, open space areas, landscaping and any other
improvements that are to be maintained by the HOA in perpetuity must be submitted, reviewed,
approved, and signed versions of the documents must be provided prior to the final site plan approval.
The first submittal of a "Declaration of Covenants, conditions and restrictions for Berkmar Overlook"
was submitted on 4/22/2021 but has not vet been reviewed.
38. Rev. 2: [New Commentl Double frontage lots are treated differently in site plan review and subdivision
plat review. So, the final site plan must be approved prior to the subdivision plat. Because of this, the
easements shown on the subdivision plat currently under review must be separated out, into a new
easement plat (application and fee) so that the easements can be approved prior to the final site plan.
Rev. 3: Comment not vet fully addressed. The submitted easement plat must be approved and
recorded prior to the final site plan approval.
39. Rev. 3 rNew Commentl Ensure any missing RWSA easements are added to the site plan. See
3/29/2021 RWSA SUB2021-22 comments forwarded to you by planning reviewer on that same date.
Staff has provided references to provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. The
Code is kept up to date by the County Attorney's office. The Code may be found on the County Attorney's
website which may be found under "Departments" at Albemarle.org.
In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.3.5 of Chapter 18 of the Code if the developer fails to submit
a revised final site plan to address all of the requirements within six (6) months after the date of this letter
the application shall be deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn by the developer.
Please contact Paty Saternye in the Planning Division by using psaternve(aalbemarle.org or 434-296-5832
ext. 3250 for further information.
County of Albemarle
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Project:
Project file number:
Plan preparer:
Owner or rep.:
Plan received date:
(Rev. 1)
(Rev. 2)
(Rev. 3)
Date of comments:
(Rev. 1)
(Rev. 2)
(Rev. 3)
Reviewer:
Project Coordinator:
Site Plan review
Berk mar Overlook - FSP
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
Telephone:434-296-5832
WWW.ALBEMARLE.ORG
Scott Collins, Collins Engineering [200 Garrett St., Suite K, Charlottesville, VA
22902, scott@collins-en ing eering com]
Berk mar Development, LLC / 2496 Old Ivy Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903
29 Apr 2020
30 Sep 2020
3 Dec 2020
17 Mar 2021
13 Jun 2020
1 Oct 2020
8 Jan 2021
3 Apr 2021, updated 23-Apr 2021 (Rev. 3-b)
John Anderson
Paty Saternye
Engineering has reviewed the final site plan, and offers the following comments. (Rev. 1) Please note: Several
review comment persists ( items 4 5), majority of prior Engineering review comments are addressed. (Rev. 2) Only
review item 5 remains. (Rev. 3-!1) Only two review items remain: 18 19.
Sheet I
1. A road plan needs to be approved prior to final site plan approval, SUB202000004 is under review. (Rev.
1) Addressed. Note: Revised Road Plan submitted 9/27/20.
2. Ensure FSP is consistent with road plan, final plat (SUB202000071), and approved WPO201900050. (Rev.
1) Addressed. Applicant response (9/16/20 letter): `The FSP is now consistent with the revised Road Plan.'
3. Sheet 2, Note 5: Recommend correct typos at ` 195' and `performs'. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
4. Sheet 3: Revise graphic depiction of CG- 12 ramps in radial curbs, similar to revised CG-12 shown on the
MJH Apartments FSP. (Rev. 1) Not addressed. Please depict similar to MJH Apartments FSP,
SDP202000023, Sheet 4 (image belew). [image removed with Rev. 2 comment] (Rev. 2) Addressed.
Sheets 3, 4
5. Provide copy of recorded Retaining Wall Maintenance Agreement for retaining walls that cross subdivision
lot lines. We appreciate deed db. _ pg. _ labels on the FSP. (Rev. 1) Persists. Applicant: `A copy of
the recorded Retaining Wall Maintenance Agreement shall be provided as soon as it is recorded.' (Rev. 2)
Persists. Scott Collins email recognizes this (December 14, 2020 5:41 PM), it reads it part: `I would like to
confirm all other comments have been addressed, except for ... and adding the deed book /page info.' Also,
S. Collins email (December 14, 2020 5:37 PM) is helpful: `We need to first get the road plan approved,
then record the subdivision plat, update the site plan with the recordation information for the final site plan,
and then resubmit the site plan for approval.' (Rev. 3) Withdrawn. Easement plat (SUB202100022) will
be approved prior to the FSP, so comment to be addressed in course of easement plat review.
(Rev. 1) Remaining review comments (items 6-17) are addressed.
6. Show and label public drainage easements using a lighter line -type (similar to proposed sight distance
easements). Public drainage easements appear to cross portions of Lots 23, 24, 43, 47, 29, and 30.
Sheet 4
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
7. Empire Street: Revise per Planning Division Road Plan review comment to provide a 6' planting strip
between bump out parking spaces and sidewalk. Engineering support Planning Div. Road Plan review
comment.
8. Add sheet 9 detail reference for `proposed dry curb' (Int. Swede /Marsac) since meaning of label is unclear.
9. Label post /embedment bollard detail, upper-righthand comer. Provide additional bollards: 6' OC, max.
10. Sheet 6: Provide public drainage easement for Lot 23 (every other lot with public drainage easement
appears covered) —thank you.
11. Sheet 8: Proposed grade directs (lawn surface) runoff to retaining walls on Lot 31, and Lots 35-42. In
addition to proposed private roof drain system, provide runoff conveyance that redirects surface runoff
away from back face of retaining walls on these lots. Runoff may not simply sheet over the top of walls.
Sheet 9
12. Revise cross-section for Empire Street to show bump out parking with planting strip, if a 6' planting strip
between these parking spaces and sidewalks persists as a Planning comment. A text block is insufficient
guide and may confuse if intended to modify a cross-section. A graphic cross-section must adequately
depict design of Empire Street through portions with and without bump out parking.
13. Provide VDOT (or equivalent) details for:
a. Retaining wall safety railing
b. Pipe bedding (concrete)
c. Pipe bedding (HDPE)
d. Inlet shaping (IS-l)
e. %" steel plate (Str. 6, 8, etc.)
f MH steps (ST-1)
g. dry curb
h. Ex. cemetery proposed black decorative fence with gate details.
14. Sheet 14: Label Str. 6, 8, etc. (vertical drop >4') to receive V2" steel plate in floor of MH.
15. Sheets 4, 6, 20: Recommend label references to cemetery decorative fencing /gate (civil) details.
16. Sheet 19 Note 1: Indicate slopes > 3: l will be planted with native steep slope mix with annual ryegrass.
Please provide additional detail as well as plan notes that indicate this is not a `grass' mix that requires
periodic mowing. Provide specific details. Please ref. ACDSM 8.A.2. for vegetative ground cover
requirements to plant proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 with species which will not require mowing.
17. Compare desiL`n of nrnrinsed n,d,h, duiicasements ncainst ACDSM required width equation:
Require,. ). Recommend easement table.
18. New: Revise FSP to reflect revisions made with WPO201900050 -Amendment #1, Approved 4/2/21.
Engineering welcomes .PDF preview of SDP202000042, sheet 7, etc.
SDP202000042, sheet 7; please show:
• Proposed grade between lots 26 and 27. [Also, review comment with WPO202100014]
• Revised SWM facility access.
• Note: G. Murray explained CE CAD file structure should ensure next submittal of FSP reflects
revisions made with WPO201900050 -Amendment #L
Ref images, below
19. New (Rev. 3-b): Please submit Amendment Application for WPO200400080 at earliest convenience.
SDP202000042 and WPO201900050 remove SWM facility (biofilter) approved with WPO200400080
(Foundations Child Development Center). Equivalent phosphorus removal is required to be provided
before recorded SWM easement at bk.-pg. 2834-1 can be vacated. Engineering recommends nutrient credit
purchase. WPO200400080 Amendment approval is required prior to SDP202000042 approval.
Email/s sent April 16, 2021 5:30 PM, 4/21/2021 5:35 PM, April 21, 2021 10:58 AM, and
4/23/2021 12:48 PM discuss this topic, and Amendment application request in detail.
SDP202000042, sheet 7
I LOT, LOT, LOTj� LOTp
—LOTJ5 _ -T�
i 2S
LOT as
t e
LOTx I� a�
1 OT2
OTa9
1~11
�LOT��az2
� T3LO3
0
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
\\
WOWOf 111P4
\
wMCA,I[E w�MµBM1SP
•I,lae
y
Please feel free to call if any questions: 434,296-5832 -x3069
Thank you
SDP2020-00042 Berkmar Overlook 042321rev3-b
No ]6IBI
NSRI