HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB202100011 Correspondence 2021-07-26608 Preston Avenue
P 434.295.5624
Suite 200 IF434.295.1800
T I M M O N S GROUP
Charlottesville, VA 22903 www.timmons.com
July 22, 2021
Matt Wentland
County of Albemarle
Community Development
401 McIntire Rd, North Wing
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SUB-2021-00011 -Southwood Phase I Blocks 9, 10, & 11— Road & Drainage Plan Review -
Comment Response Letter
Dear Mr. Wentland:
We have reviewed your comments from March 23, 2021 and made the necessary revisions.
Please find our responses to the comments below in bold lettering.
Engineering:
1. Show sight distance triangles and profiles for the internal travelways.
Given that these travelways are private alleys not major roads with low speeds (under 20
mph) and low traffic volumes it does not appear VDOT or AASHTO sight distances would
apply. Stops signs have been provided at the internal intersections to control movements.
2. The underground storage facility A will need to be removed from beneath the parking
and travelway in front of Lots 71 and 72 and relocated outside of any travelways or
where its repair/replacement will affect a travelway. Engineering recommends it be
moved to behind lots like SWM B.
SWM facility A has been relocated.
3. Alley 2 is shown with an inverse crown. Provide inlets in the alley to prevent stormwater
from exiting the alley and flowing across the connected travelways.
Structure 232 has been added.
4. Provide stop signs for intersection involving the private road and Alley 3.
Stop signs and stop bars have been added to the internal interactions.
5. Show and label the road name signs.
Road name signs have been added and labeled on all relevant sheets.
6. Provide vertical curves on grade transitions in the alleys.
Vertical curves have been provided for all grade transitions.
ENGINEERING I DESIGN I TECHNOLOGY
7. Provide a level area adjacent to parking (such as on Alley 1) so residents are not exiting
their vehicle directly onto a slope.
A 5' wide level area has been provided adjacent to parking on New Leaf Drive as requested.
8. The landscaping plan is not being reviewed or approved with these plans, only the street
tree locations relative to the storm system. The proposed trees should not be located
directly next to inlets (such as on Road 1).
Acknowledged. Tree locations have been adjusted to provide more space between inlets and
trees. Tree locations over top of SWM B have been coordinated with the manufacturer and
deemed acceptable. Adequate soil depth for the selected species is provided see note on
sheet 1-1.2 at the top of the sheet.
Planning —Megan Nedostup:
1. Information not related to the road plans should be removed from these plans.
Approval of the road plans is not approval of, as an example, all the landscaping shown.
Only the required street trees should be shown on the road plans. The Open Space Plan,
Housing and Density Plan, and Lot Layout and Easement Plan, should be removed from
this plan set. The easements related to the road should be shown on the road plans and
not be a separate plan.
Acknowledged. Some sheets have been removed from this set; a note has been added to
other sheets to clarify that they are included for informational purposes only.
2. [32.5.2 (a)] Include the ZMA number on the plans with the zoning district note
(ZMA2018-003).
Zoning district note (ZMA2018-003) has been referred to on the Cover sheet.
3. [32.5.2 (b); 32.5.2 (q)] The trip generation should be cumulative, revise to include prior
blocks to be provided for traffic. This will allow quick confirmation that the total trip
generation does not exceed 5,000 per the Code of Development.
The total trip generation has been provided on Sheet C0.0 and demonstrates that the average
daily trips, for the two phases together, will not exceed 5,000.
4. [ZMA; Code of Development, page 13, 15] Parking is not permitted in the trail buffer
area. Remove the proposed parking.
Parking has been removed from the trail buffer area.
5. [32.7.9.5] Street streets should be planted every 50 feet. The calculation for x number of
linear feet divided by 50 is not sufficient. It appears that there is a need for an additional
tree along Road 1 adjacent to the townhomes.
Street tree calculation and spacing has been updated.
6. [32.5.2 (i)] Provide the street names for all alleys, travelways, and roads.
Street names have been provided for all alleys, travelways, and roads on all applicable plan
sheets.
VDOT—Adam Moore:
1. Please label Rte. 631 edge of pavement on each plan sheet.
The existing edge of pavement on Route 631 has been labeled on each plan sheet.
2. Please label Rte. 631 prescriptive easement line on each plan sheet.
The Route 631 prescriptive easement has been labeled on each plan sheet.
3. Please label the grey dash line, top of sheet C5.0, from Rte. 631 to Rte. 631.
The grey dashed line on sheet C5.0 is called out as the VDOT Sight Distance Easement.
4. Sight lines location of eye do not appear to be per RDM F-40 Intersection Sight Distance
detail and table 2-5 and RDM B(1) 19 Sight Distance. Eye location will be a minimum
14.5 feet from the edge of travel lane. Plan sheets C8.6 & C8.7.
Sight lines have been revised accordingly so that the eye location is 14.5' from the edge of the
travel lane.
5. Please remove the parking spaces within the clear sight triangles along Horizon Road.
No parking signs have been added within the clear sight distance triangles along Horizon
Road.
6. Please show mill and overlay on plans in accordance with WP-2. Show limits of mill and
overlay to adjacent travel lane. Also, please add the WP-2 detail to the plans.
Mill and overlay has been shown on sheets C2.0, C4.0, and C4.2.
7. Plan Sheet C8.8 Sight Distance Profiles needs additional information / clarification
a. Planting plans shows this area vegetated.
Existing trees within the hatched area will remain. However, we have shifted all
proposed trees so that they are not located within the sight distance easement. Only
low shrubs are proposed within the easement at the lowest grade point which is along
the access path and will not obstruct sight lines.
b. Line of sight is not clearly depicted and should have profiles showing the
proposed area from the vehicle path along Rte. 631, clear at all times.
The profile has been revised to clearly depict the line of sight. The proposed area from
the vehicle path along Route 631 is clear at all times. In fact, this is an improvement to
the existing line of site for this easement which is currently through a forested area.
8. Plan Sheets C5.3 & C8.8 — Proposed grade appears to concentrate storm water flows
towards Rte. 631 in addition to the SWM outlet structure. How will this existing
structure and road area be protected?
Additional riprap has been added to protect the structure and road area.
9. Plan Sheets C5.3 & C8.8 — Will existing culvert under Rte. 631 carry the minimum 10-
year storm event in an open channel design? VDOT drainage manual requires culverts to
have a Max Hw/D of 1.5 and headwater elevation should be no higher than 18" below
edge of road.
Culvert calculations have been performed for each existing culvert and added to the drainage
report.
10. Please show all radii and appropriate geometry.
All radii and appropriate geometry have been shown on sheets C4.0-C4.2.
11. Please show the CG-12 locations.
CG-12 locations have been labeled on sheets C4.0-C4.2.
12. Please label the type of CG proposed.
CG-6 and CG-2 has been labeled on sheets C4.0-C4.2.
13. Has the entrance location for the proposed development across the street been
determined? Entrances should be in line with each other.
The entrance for the proposed development across the street has not yet been determined.
14. Please add a note to plan: Landscaping plants and trees adjacent to and within the sight
distance triangle will need to be maintained in area between 2 and 7 feet above ground
as a clear zone to preserve sight lines and accommodate pedestrians.
This note has been added to Sheet L1.0.
15. Note that the final plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual
Appendices B (1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other
requirements.
Acknowledged.
16. Due to the level of items noted in this review, these comments may not be exhaustive.
Acknowledged.
17. Please provide a comment response letter with each submission after the initial.
Acknowledged.
ACSA— Richard Nelson:
1. The road plans are currently under review with ACSA.
Acknowledged.
GIS—Brian Becker:
1. Critical Issues: Private Road, Alley 1, 2, & 3 will require road names for E911 addressing.
Street names have been provided for all alleys, travelways, and roads on all applicable plan
sheets.
2. Comments: The access ways designated on the plan as "Private Road", "Alley 1", "Alley
2" and "Alley 3" will require road names for addressing assigning purposes. Per the
Albemarle County Road Naming and Property Numbering Ordinance, Sec. 7-200, Part B
(page 2 of the PDF):
"It is intended by this article that all roads within the county which serve or are designed
to serve three (3) or more dwelling units or business structures shall be named..."
Street names have been provided for all alleys, travelways, and roads on all applicable plan
sheets.
Fire Rescue:
1. Please confirm segments of the travel ways that are 20' or less of unobstructed travel
way are marked no parking.
There are no proposed segments of travel ways that are less than 20' wide.
We have included PDF copies of the plans and calculations for your review. If you have any
questions or comments, please feel free to give me a call at 434.295.5624 or email at
bryan.cichocki@timmons.com .
Sincerely,
i
Bryan Cichocki, PE
Project Manager