HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB202100116 Review Comments Preliminary Plat 2021-08-06tloF tt Kevin McCollum
Countyof Albemarle Planner, Planning
kmccollum@alebmarle.org
h•_ Community Development Department - Department Telephone: (434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
• �ZecIN��'.
Memorandum
To: Scott Collins (scottPcollins-engineerina.com) and Alan Taylor (alan(@riverbenddev.com)
Date: August 6, 2021
Re: SUB202100116 Granger Property Preliminary Plat — Notice of Disapproval
Because the above -referenced preliminary subdivision plat does not comply with all applicable requirements, it
is hereby disapproved pursuant to Albemarle County Code § 14-222(D). The comments below state the reasons
for disapproval by identifying the plat's deficiencies and citing the applicable sections of the Albemarle County
Code or other applicable laws, and what corrections or modifications will permit approval of the plat.
In accordance with Albemarle County Code § 14-222(E), the subdivider may resubmit the preliminary plat within
fifteen (15) days after the date of this disapproval letter in order to address the outstanding comments. The
date of the next application deadline after the resubmittal of the plat shall be deemed to be the date upon
which the plat was officially submitted. In the event the subdivider fails to resubmit the plat within the fifteen
(15) day period, the plat shall be deemed to be disapproved and a new application and fee will be required for
submittal of the plat.
1. [14-311 and 14-410] Please see Fire & Rescue and Engineering Division comments below. Stribling Avenue Extended
does not currently meet the minimum design requirements for a secondary emergency access road. A secondary
emergency/fire apparatus access road meeting all applicable design standards is required due to the number of lots
proposed. The emergency access road cannot be approved as shown on the preliminary plat due to numerous
deficiencies with the design.
2. [14-302(A)] Please provide approximate dimensions and area of each proposed lot to ensure all lots are meeting the
minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 sq. Ft. for a Bonus Level Cluster Development as specified in Section 18-13.3
of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. Serra Drive crosses a Water Protection Ordinance (WPO) stream buffer, the Flood Hazard Overlay District (FH), and the
Preserved Steep Slopes Overlay District in order to provide access and frontage to Lots 55-67. This poses several
issues related to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements:
a. [14-302 (111)(9), 14-308, and 14-400] Per Section 18-30.3.11 of the Zoning Ordinance, the grading activities
needed to construct the Serra Drive street crossing through the Flood Hazard Overlay District are not consistent
with the uses permitted within the Regulatory Floodway. Per Engineering Division comments, a Floodplain
Development Permit (FDP) is required for any development proposed within the 100-year floodplain.
b. [14-307] The preliminary plat does not provide the information required to show that the stream crossing would
satisfy the requirements of section 17- 320(D) or, in the alternative, section 17-321(4).
c. [14-304] Use of TMP 76-24 can be accomplished without Serra Drive crossing the Preserved Steep Slopes
behind/adjacent to Lots 17 and 18 as currently shown on the preliminary plat. In order to disturb the Preserved
Steep Slopes and construct the street in this location, the applicant must amend the Preserved Steep Slopes
District boundaries in accordance with Section 18-30.7.6. Please see attached Engineering Division comments for
additional information.
W W W.ALBEMARLE.ORG
401 McIntire Road, North Wing, I Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
4. [General Comment] Pending any changes caused by the comments above and any additional SRC Reviewers
Comments, additional changes may be required prior to preliminary plat approval.
5. [General Comment] Road plan approval will be required prior to final plat approval. Street tree requirements will be
reviewed along with the road plans.
6. [General Comment] Please see Parks comments below regarding the proposed open space and trails.
7. [General Comment] Final plat must demonstrate compliance with all applicable Subdivision Ordinance requirements
prior to approval. This includes all applicable Sections of 14-303, 14-302 through 14-312, 14-314, 14-316, 14-317, 14-
318, and 14-400 through 14-441.
8. [14-302 (A)(3)] Please state the width of Sunset Avenue Extended.
9. [14-302 (A)(13)] Please see attached Engineering Division comments. The layout of sanitary sewer utility lines need
to be revised in order to not impact Preserved Steep Slopes in certain areas.
10. [14-302 (A)(13)] Please label and identify proposed stormwater management facilities as specified by Engineering
comments.
11. [14-302 (A)(14)] Add a note to the plat stating who will own and maintain all private open space areas.
12. [14-303 (A)] On the final plat, please add a statement of consent to division as follows: "The platting or dedication of
the following described land [insert a correct description of the land subdivided] is with the free consent and in
accordance with the desire of the undersigned owners, proprietors and trustees, if any."
13. [14-302 (A)(14), 14-303 (G), and 18-13.4.21 Notes on sheet 1 state that the open space within the WPO stream
buffer is proposed to be dedicated to Albemarle County for public use as a greenway. In order for the County to
accept this open space area, the Board of Supervisors must take an action to approve the proposed land dedication.
a. [14-302 (13)(3)] Please clearly identify the limits of the open space that is proposed to be dedicated to the
County for public use.
b. [14-303 (T)] If the Board approves the proposed land dedication, the public open space/greenway will be a
Special Lot. The following note must be added to the plat: "Lot'X' is a special lot established solely for (insert
purpose for the special lot as identified in the definition of special lot in section 14-106)."
c. [78-13.4.2 and 14-426] Please submit a written request for the proposed dedication of land to Albemarle County
for public use. The request must be reviewed by staff and forwarded to the Board for a final action. If the Board
does not accept the land dedication, then the plat will need to be revised so identify who will own and maintain
the proposed open space areas.
14. [14-303 (L)] Identify the location and dimensions of each public utility, drainage and sight distance easement outside
of a street right-of-way; for each existing easement, include a note stating the deed book and page number.
15. [14-303 (M)] The name of each proposed street, which names shall be subject to approval by the agent. See E911
comments for more information.
16. [14-303 (0)] On the first sheet, add signature panels for each owner and for the agent or his designee. The signature
panel for the owner shall be located immediately below the statement required by Section 14-303 (A).
17. [14-303 (P)] Add notary panels for the notary to acknowledge the signature of the owner.
18. [14-303 (Q)] Add a note stating that the properties will be served by the public water and sewer system.
W W W.ALBEMARLE.ORG
401 McIntire Road, North Wing, I Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
19. [14-311] Road plan application and Water Protection Ordinance (WPO) application approvals are required prior to
final plat approval.
20. [14-316] Prior to final plat approval, all VDOT requirements must be satisfied for entrances onto public streets. Please
see attached VDOT comments for further information.
a. [14-413 and 14-428] Please see attached VDOT comments regarding improvements needed to Sunset Avenue
Extended, including dedication of additional right-of-way.
21. [14-317] Prior to final plat approval, an instrument evidencing maintenance of all required improvements (open space
lots, private easements, etc.) must be submitted and reviewed to ensure compliance all applicable sub -sections of
Section 14-317.
22. [14-400] 20% of the required open space must be located outside of the elements specified in Section 18-4.7(c)(3).
The plat does not provide documentation that the required 3.45 acres (20%) of open space outside of those elements
is met. Open space areas (lot boundaries) must be clearly delineated, and all of the environmental elements that are
limited by Section 18-4.7(c)(3) must be shown and dimensioned so that staff can verify that the development meets
this standard.
23. [14-410] Please see attached VDOT and Engineering Division comments. The preliminary plat does not provide
enough information to ascertain whether the proposed entrance onto Sunset Avenue Extended meets the minimum
standards for public streets specified by the Subdivision Ordinance.
Please contact Kevin McCollum at the Department of Community Development at kmccollumPalbemarle.org or 296-5832
ext. 3141 for further information.
Comments From Other Reviewers:
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — John Anderson, ianderson2@albemarle.org — Requested changes,
see attached (8/5/2021).
Albemarle County Building Inspections — Betty Slough, bslough@albemarle.org — No objection (7/22/2021).
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — Howard Lagomarsino, hlaaomarsinoCc@albemarle.org — Requested
changes, see below.
Fire Apparatus access are required for this project and the number of units proposed requires more than one entrance
to accommodate this. The proposed secondary emergency/fire apparatus access road off Stribling Avenue extended
does not provide adequate access for apparatus:
a. Fire Apparatus requires 13 ft. 6 in overhead clearance. The railroad underpass on Stribling Ave. extended, from
the Fontaine Ave. side, in addition to not providing this required overhead clearance, is too narrow for
apparatus, so ingress from this side is not possible.
b. The grade from the opposite side of Stribling Ave extended, the width of the road and its condition/upkeep
from the Nob Hill side is not adequate for a Fire Apparatus access road.
c. The turn from Stribling Ave extended onto the proposed secondary emergency access road is too sharp
(appears to exceed the 25 ft radii minimum required by code) for fire apparatus roads
d. The proposed secondary access road includes a bridge that traverses a creek that also feeds and joins a creek
that flows at the main entrance. In a flood situation, both entrances can flood from the same event, causing
isolation of the homes proposed during that event.
e. Any bridge design must support the weight of fire apparatus (85,000 lbs.)
W W W.ALBEMARLE.ORG
401 McIntire Road, North Wing, I Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
2. Though not necessarily needed to be specifically address at the plat phase of the project, keep in mind, in addition to
the above, at later stages of process, such as site plan phase, ACFR concerns include:
a. To accommodate emergency/fire vehicle access, emergency vehicle access road(s)/route(s) are required
b. Fire apparatus access roads shall extend to within 150 feet (45 720 mm) of all portions of the facility and/or all
portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the buildings as measured by an approved route around the
exterior of the buildings or facility.
c. An emergency/fire vehicle access road/route needs to provide a suitable surface to sustain the weight of
emergency apparatus weighing up to 85,000 lbs.
d. An emergency/fire vehicle access road/route needs to provide an unobstructed travel way width of 20 ft. if
buildings/structures are under 30 feet tall and 26 ft. if buildings/structures are over 30 feet tall
e. Emergency/fire vehicle access roads need to be clear of overhead obstructions at 13 ft 6 in. and below
f. To accommodate fire apparatus, turn radii serving fire apparatus access must be a minimum of 25 ft.
g. To ensure that parking does not obstruct the emergency apparatus travel way as described above, any
parking must be designed to and/or no parking signs are required to maintain the required unobstructed
travel way widths
h. Any dead-end longer than 150 ft requires an approved turn around for emergency apparatus
i. Road grade cannot exceed 10 %
j. Provide a note on the plans of the required ISO fire calculation for the buildings
k. Indicate on the plan the latest ACSW flow test to ensure adequate fire flow per calculation in comment #j
I. Provide the locations of fire hydrants as determined by calculations in #j, with spacing in accordance with the
required fire flow calculation (This starts at 500 feet and arranged so that no building is more than 250 feet
from a hydrant, as required fire flow increases the distances are reduced as the required fire flow increases).
m. In areas without buildings, then hydrant spacing is required every 1000 ft to accommodate transportation
emergencies.
Virginia Department of Transportation — Adam Moore, Adam.Moore(@vdot.virginia.gov and Doug McAvoy Jr.,
douglas.mcavoy@vdot.virginia.gov — Requested changes, see attached (7/12/2021).
Albemarle County Service Authority — Richard Nelson, rnelson@serviceauthority.org — Requested changes (7/30/2021).
1. Utility plan approval will be required prior to final plat approval.
2. RWSA will need to review and approve proposed water and sewer main connections.
Virginia Department of Health — Alan Mazurowski, alan.mazurowski(c@vdh.virginia.gov— No objection (7/22/2021).
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority — Victoria Fort and Dyon Vega, vfort(cbrivanna.org and dvegaC@rinavvan.org —
Requested changes (7/15/2021).
1. Sheet No. 8
a. The sewer connection is currently tied into RWSA at 3 different points. Please revise and make all connections
to ACSA.
b. The Water connection is not specified, please also connect to ACSA.
Albemarle County Parks and Recreation (Parks) — Tim Padalino, toadalinoC@albemarle.org — Requested changes
(7/20/2021).
W W W.ALBEMARLE.ORG
401 McIntire Road, North Wing, I Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
1. ACPR staff notes that the "Parks & Green Systems Plans" contained in the adopted Southern and Western Urban
Neighborhoods Master Plan (2015) identify several features on this subject property (including Steep Slopes (>25%),
100-year Floodplain, Water Protection Ordinance Buffers, and Existing and Proposed Greenways].
2. Staff acknowledges the "Open Space Proposed" note on Sheet 1, which states that "Note: Open Space contained
within the 100' stream buffer shall be dedicated to public use as a greenway. A public trail is proposed within the
greenway to be dedicated to public use."
a. ACPR staff recommends the plat be revised to clarify if the proposal is to convey a public greenway easement
in the specified areas, or to convey a fee simple dedication of land in the specified areas to the County for
public use.
b. ACPR staff also recommends this note be revised to include the following: "...shall be dedicated to public use
as a greenway within six (6) months upon demand by the County."
c. ACPR staff also recommends this note be revised to clarify whether the proposed public trail will be
constructed by owner/applicant prior to dedicating the proposed open space area(s) to public use. ACPR staff
further recommends that the public trail be constructed by the owner/applicant - or if such trail currently
exists in part or full, that the trail be maintained and improved to meet Class B Trail standards as specified in
the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual prior to conveyance to and acceptance by the County.
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — Elise Kiewra, ekiewra@albemarle.org — Requested changes, see
attached (7/9/2021).
W W W.ALBEMARLE.ORG
401 McIntire Road, North Wing, I Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
V
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
County of Albemarle Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Telephone:434-296-5832
WWW.ALBEMARLE.ORG
Preliminary Plat review
Project title:
Granger Property Preliminary Plat
Project file number:
SUB202100116
Plan preparer:
Scott Collins, PE, Collins Engineering [ scotte collins-en ing eering.com ]
200 Garret Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902
Owner or rep.:
Stribling Holdings, LLC
P.O. Box 1467, Charlottesville, VA 22902
Applicant:
Alan Taylor [ alan(a),,riverbenddev.com ] Riverbend Development
455 Second Street SE, Suite 201 / Charlottesville, VA 22902
Plan received date:
30 Jun 2021
Date of comments:
5 Aug 2021
Plan Coordinator:
Kevin McCollum
Reviewer:
John Anderson
Engineering has reviewed the preliminary plat and offers these review comments.
1. General
a. Provide drainage system profile, Engineering accepts that complete details will be shown with
ROAD plan, but needs preliminary storm system (drainage) profile information before design
proceeds too far.
b. Please submit WPO plan for Granger property subdivision. WPO plan approval and FDP
approval are required prior to Final Plat approval.
c. Please submit a ROAD plan application for Granger property. ROAD Plan must be approved,
and roads either built or bonded prior to Final Plat approval.
d. Bridges and Emergency access that serve the proposed road network, or that serve as second
point of (emergency) access must also be built or bonded prior to Final Plat approval.
e. SWM detention (stormwater quantity) design is shown (conceptual, UG detention). Please
provide narrative and schematic conceptual stormwater quality (SWM) design for Granger
property subdivision.
f. 14-304 appears to require that since the proposed subdivision will require disturbing steep
slopes, `the subdivider shall submit ... a written request or application under the applicable
sections of the zoning ordinance.' Engineering reminds that subdivider /developer has an
apparent obligation to submit written request to disturb both managed and preserved steep
slopes. Engineering defers to Planning Division.
g. Note: It is difficult given extent of interrelated comments to specifically separate and identify
which might be required for preliminary plat approval, which may be deferred until final plat
submittal, but Engineering understands that Planning Division may require preliminary plat
resubmittal (i.e., intends to issue an action letter as opposed to an SRC comment letter). To
the extent Planning guides Applicant resubmittal of a preliminary (subdivision) plat for the
Granger property, please address as many Engineering review comments with preliminary
plat resubmittal as is practically possible.
h. Given extent of comments, additional preliminary plat comments are possible with
preliminary plat resubmittal.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 8
2. Sheet 2
a. `Limits of WPO buffer and 100 year floodplain' (single label) identifies separate line types.
Please revise label to read 100 year floodplain and provide separate label for WPO buffer, and
provide leader lines to WPO buffer and 100 year floodplain, independently, consistent with
GIS, to avoid confusion. Different limits apply to development within WPO buffer and
floodplain.
b. Submit a floodplain development permit (FDP) application for development within the
floodplain.
c. At existing Southern railroad underpass, there appears to be heavy line -type that may indicate
proposed grading. Please confirm whether grading or structural work to underpass within
Southern Railroad RW is proposed with preliminary plat, and if so, please furnish evidence of
agreement and approval to grade or construct improvements within Southern RR RW.
Engineering will consider proposed grade shown on WPO plan at this location with care.
d. Sheet 2 shows an 8' x 8' concrete arched culvert beneath Southern Railroad. Sheet 11 does
not show this portion of the development. Please resubmit with all portions of developed
property displayed in adequate detail. Note: 8' x 8' culvert is shown on Sheet 4 but should
display on smaller -scale Grading and Layout sheets, if only as an inset detail.
e. Please add label to existing 2 Story building (to be removed) since layout sheet shows
building is removed with cul-de-sac development /building lots on Serra Drive.
f. Show /label extents of VDPCO facility, TMP 76B-1-71 specifically, please show existing:
i. Entrance to VDPCO facility
ii. Facility fencing
Ref satellite imagery, below; 6/2/20 [ source: Pictometry - CONNECTExolorerT -
3. Sheet 3
a. Show and label OIIP to Wingfield residence, TNT 76-3-34 (Sunset Ave. Ext.). Ref satellite
imagery, blue circle, below (6/2/2020):
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 8
4. Sheet 4
a. Existing 14'-20' paved asphalt road must be capable of supporting 85,000 lb. emergency fire -
rescue apparatus. Provide narrative, evaluation, and propose improvements to ensure ex.
paved asphalt road meets fire -rescue width, geometry, and weight -bearing requirements.
b. Multiple lots are proposed within existing (presumed high voltage) 120' VEPCO easement:
i. Label VEPCO easement.
ii. Engineering defers to Planning Division and VEPCO, but recommends:
1. Applicant coordinate design with VEPCO.
2. Fumish written correspondence between Applicant and VEPCO, that
VEPCO approves preliminary plat for Granger Property, to include specific
acceptance of
a. Portions of Lots (22, 23, 24, 30, 31, 32, 33, 48, 49, 50, 51) within
VEPCO easement.
b. Grading flatter slopes to a steeper proposed final grade, which may
affect VEPCO ability to access or utilize their existing easement.
c. Explicit acceptance on Applicant's part that VEPCO easement
access likely entitles VEPCO to occupy full easement width, with
equipment and /or materials needed to maintain high -voltage lines,
with little or no obligation to repair what will become lawn areas.
d. Explicit acceptance on Applicant's part of future risk to owners of
SF residences on Lots 2, 23, 31, preliminary plat proposes building
sites immediately adjacent to VEPCO easement. In case of Lot 22,
building site effectively touches VEPCO easement. Ref. typical
Lot detail.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 8
OT21 �' \
ErpgCk +i\
LOT 22 \�\j
Y LOT p�
c. Sunset Avenue Extended
i. Please label existing roadway width.
ii. Ensure existing roadway width at subdivision entrance can accommodate left -turning
inbound single -unit (SU) truck design vehicle, as defined by AASHTO, without SU
vehicle crossing CL (whether CL is marked, or not) of primary subdivision access
(Crespi Bluff Drive), and without crossing CL of Sunset Avenue Ext. except at point
of intersection. Note: Graphic of 20-ft wheelbase SU truck design vehicle' is less
than wheelbase length of typical moving vehicles that will utilize primary
subdivision access, not just with initial owner move -in activities, but perpetually.
iii. Provide Auto -turn figure at intersection of Crespi Bluff Drive and Sunset Ave. Ext.
' Appendix B(1) subdivision street design guide, p. 8. [image, below]
htti)s://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/LocDes/RDM/AnnendB Lod
FIGURE B(1)-1 MINIMUM TURNING PATH FOR SINGLE UNIT TRUCK SU-30
Rev 10120
d. Provide deed book -page ref. for Stribling Avenue.
Sheets 4-6, Future connector road, multiple issues:
a. Corridor violates ordinance and VDOT standards or requirements, and cannot be constructed
in this location, given:
Engineering Review Comments
Page 5 of 8
i. Preserved slopes
ii. Stream buffer
iii. Sideslope (required deep cut/fill across slopes, or within stream buffer)
b. Illogical or problematic geometry. Proposed future connector road:
i. At south end foams an acute angle intersection with Sunset Avenue Extended.
Revise to provide right-angle or near right-angle intersection with Sunset Ave. Ext.
ii. At north end terminates abruptly at development boundary within or immediately
adjacent to these overlay or zoning features: 100 year floodplain, stream buffer,
preserved steep slopes, it is exceedingly unlikely that a future connector road will
ever need to be, or will actually be, built along this corridor.
iii. Engineering defers to Planning Div. on purpose or requirements that may stipulate a
future (road) connector corridor in this location but lists obstacles to construction of
a future road in this location, given stream, slope and floodplain impacts.
6. Sheet 7
a. Show full extent of proposed emergency access, from proposed bridge replacement for
emergency access to the site, to Stribling Ave. Note: Layout and Grading sheets should show
full extent of development. Albemarle can make no assumptions concerning areas not shown.
b. Show and label footprint of proposed UG detention (SWM facility) on Lot 55.
c. Show and label proposed SWM facility easement on Lot 55. Ref. sheet 11 for schematic.
7. Sheets 8, 10
a. Culvert alignment beneath Sera Drive is problematic, and cannot be approved by Albemarle,
it may be disallowed by VDOT, as well. Alignment shows Moore's Creek streamline striking
at or behind upstream headwall. Moore's Creek must enter drainage structure at this or
revised structure location with very slight (preferably no) angle to avoid long -tern erosion,
embankment failure, and maintenance concerns.
8. Sheet 8
a. Delete reference to proposed 100' WPO buffer, buffer exists as an overlay, is not proposed
with development.
b. Label proposed secondary subdivision emergency access.
c. Proposed emergency access intersects Stribling Avenue at an acute angle that appears to
require fire rescue apparatus to pass beneath railway, via tunnel. Provide Auto -turn and
coordinate with ACF&R to ensure responding apparatus (likely City of Charlottesville
Fontaine Fire Station 10) can use secondary access, either via tunnel or can navigate acute
angle at intersection of subdivision secondary emergency access and Stribling Avenue.
d. Provide sealed design for bridge capable of supporting 85,000 lb. fire apparatus at Morey
Creek (see emergency access roadway design weight -bearing capacity label, sheet 7).
e. 4-line underground SWM detention system shows easement encroaches within proposed 61'
RW, future connector road. Remove SWM facility (and easement) from future connector
road RW.
f. Please reference easement width image, ACDSM, p. 15, and revise proposed 4-line SWM
facility easement width, per proposed SWM facility design. Proposed easement width will
likely not accommodate SWM facility. From ACDSM, P. 15
Engineering Review Comments
Page 6 of 8
EASEMENT WIDTH . DI METER. ?' . 2 (H-S9. 10' 1-'0' VLV. �
g. Revise sanitary sewer alignment, if possible, from shared lot line, Lots 30-31, to shared lot
line, Lots 31-32, to minimize impact to preserved steep slopes. Recommend examine storm
and sanitary sewer lines within same (or wider) easement, with requisite vertical /horizontal
separation.
h. Show and label SWM facility access to proposed 4-line UG detention system (see pg. 12,
ACDSM for specific requirements).
i. Retaining walls (and nearly all portions of development) will be visible from I-64 Entrance
Corridor. Engineering defers to Planning-ARB, but recommends:
i. Early coordination of retaining wall design (ht., material, color) with ARB.
ii. Submit sealed retaining wall design to Planning Division, ARB, for review of
retaining wall material, color, etc.
j. While development has no apparent obligation to construct barriers between lots and adjacent
railroad or interstate to screen lots or attenuate train or interstate ambient noise, Engineering
recommends developer consider sound attenuation and visual screening shield development
from objectionable levels of ambient rail or interstate sound, likely to increase with time.
9. Sheet 9
a. Ensure primary access to subdivision (Crespi Bluff Drive) conveys the 25-year storm event,
without overtopping roadway surface.
b. Label existing VDOT culvert beneath I-64, label culvert type, and dimensions.
c. Provide drainage structure design for primary access, Crespi Bluff Drive, consistent with
normal design practice, including downstream receiving drainage structure capacity equal or
greater than upstream drainage structures (i.e., culvert beneath 1-64). I-64 is, in effect, a dam,
and it would be unusual to propose primary subdivision access drainage structure smaller than
the structure beneath I-64.
d. Perform hydraulic modeling for the existing drainage structure beneath 1-64 during the 25-
year event to ensure primary access to subdivision has capacity to contend with volume,
velocity, tailwater elevation, etc. discharging from existing structure beneath I-64. Existing
condition (sheet 3) indicates no other drainage structures between 1-64 and this stream's
confluence with Moore's Creek. Only a thorough drainage analysis (especially a design that
may propose a primary access culvert smaller than the upstream culvert beneath 1-64) is likely
to be approved by Albemarle, or VDOT. Provide drainage structure hydraulic calculations,
and watershed routings.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 7 of 8
e. Coordinate stream loss requirements with primary subdivision access, Crespi Bluff Drive,
with USACE (Vinny Pero), provide written evidence of coordination with USAGE.
f. Label managed steep slopes, since grading is proposed across managed steep slopes.
g. Label preserved steep slopes, to aid review, to ensure no grading or other impermissible
activity occurs on preserved steep slopes.
10. Sheet 10
a. Ref. Attached Drainage Plan checklist for plan reviewers, pg. 1, Drainage, last item, and
provide yard inlet capture /conveyance systems for drainage across 3 or more lots: Lots 28,
29, 30. Lots 37, 36, 35. Lots 41, 40, 39, 38. Lots 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Lots 42, 43, 44, 45.
11. Sheets 9, 10
a. Show discharge from proposed UG detention system shown at right margin of these sheets.
12. Sheets 10, 11
a. Match -line is discontinuous in moving from sheet 10 toll, for example: future connector
road displayed on sheet 10 does not display on sheet 11 (comment applies to sheets 6 and 7,
as well). Revise all sheets referenced to display complete layout and grading details.
13. Sheets 9, 10, 11
a. Label:
i. Moore's Creek
ii. WPO stream buffer
iii. 100 year floodplain
iv. Limits of the sunny day dam break inundation zone
b. Show driveways serving each lot, show with VDOT standard private entrance (true scale)
geometry to aid review check of potential conflicts. ROAD Plan will show this detail, but
preliminary plat proposes a level of density that supports request for this level of detail with
the preliminary plat.
c. Provide frequent existing terrain contour labels such that proposed contours, wall, and
proposed grade may be more easily evaluated against existing grade.
14. Sheet II
a. Provide landscape plan for stepped retaining wall system/s (screening shrubs planted on 10'
centers).
b. Provide landscape plan that specifies groundcover /permanent stabilization hardier than grass
for any slopes steeper than 3, 1.
c. Provide retaining wall maintenance easements for any walls that cross individual lot /parcel
boundaries, with final subdivision plat.
d. Provide evidence of recorded retaining wall maintenance agreement/s.
e. Provide drainage calculations and ditch linings consistent with calculations to prevent erosion
over slopes created by existing and proposed slopes, for example, east -west ditch due south of
Lot 73 southeast parcel boundary.
f. Remove lots from stream buffer (applies to multiple sheets). Ref. 17-601.C.: Management of
stream buffer /Incorporation into development design: `Each stream buffer shall be
incorporated into the design of the development by keeping stream buffers in open or natural
spaces, and out of residential lots or areas of active use, to the fullest extent possible.' [Note:
review comment cleared by county engineer.]
g. Note: SWM facility proposed for Lots 55 and 56 poses long-term maintenance obligation on
HOA, not the individual owners of Lots 55 and 56. SWM facility deed of dedication will be
conditioned accordingly.
h. Ensure design conforms with design standards for steep slopes at 18-30.7.5.A./13./C., for
example: at Serra Drive Moore's Creek crossing where there is apparent need for reverse
slope benching with surface water diversion.
i. Retaining wall on Lot 67 appears to lie within 5' of Southern RR property. It is unclear
whether proposed (grading or proposed) retaining walls may be constructed this close (5'-10')
to railway property. Recommend distribute development plan to Southern Railroad, and
coordinate design with Southern Railroad. Provide follow-up to Albemarle, CDD. Railroad
Engineering Review Comments
Page 8 of 8
approval of preliminary plat development design is presumed required prior to final plat
approval.
j. Provide retaining wall maintenance access from Serra Drive to multiple stepped retaining
walls that back lots 67-73.
k. Proposed build sites, Lots 67 and 68, are impractical. In each case, there is 2'-3' offset to
sunny day dam break inundation line, side setback lines, or front setback lines. Lot 68 shows
proposed grade line touching proposed build site. Each structure (SF residence), as well as
residences shown on Lots 69-73 are proposed to be built on fill that approaches 20', in places.
Revise preliminary plat to include specific and general geotechnical testing and reporting
requirements for SF residences proposed on substantial fill, include: clean /suitable earth fill
specifications, testing (Min. compaction, etc.), reporting, qualified professional geotechnical
monitoring and testing during placement of fill, specifically for these lots.
1. Proposed build sites, Lots 67-68, are inconsistent with graphic representation of these sites on
sheet 4. Revise Sheet 4, consistent with proposed Grading, sheet 11.
in. Provide sealed geotechnical retaining wall design for review /evaluation with WPO or ROAD
plan. Sealed Retaining Wall plans for wall ht. > 4-ft are required by Building Inspections and
Engineering. Sealed Retaining Wall plans are required prior to WPO or ROAD plan
approval. Ref. pg. 22, ACDSM.
n. With WPO and FDP, ensure replacement bridge over Morey Creek conforms with
requirements at Ch. 18-30.3, especially concerning fill or impact to horizontal limits of
floodplain, or base flood elevation (BFE).
Please feel free to call if any questions: 434.296-5832 -x3069
Thank you
J. Anderson
SUB2021-00116 Granger Property_prelim plat 080521.doc
Albemarle County Engineering
Drainage Plan checklist for plan reviewers
18 Feb 2014 (Use the latest checklist from the Team Services engineering forms site)
A drainage plans is typically a component of a road plan, site plan, or stormwater management plan. It
consists of the channel, ditch, culvert, or stormsewer design drawings, drainage maps, and computations
for hydrology and hydraulics.
Reference key;
[Square Brackets] are County Code references, {Curved Brackets} are policy references, and (regular
parenthesis) are explanatory. Links to reference documents are provided where possible.
A professional seal should be provided for any computation packages where are separate
from sealed plans.
Drainage: [18-32.6.2d, 14-305, 311]
drainage area maps (This is a basic element, and without this there is no review)
drainage computations (usually in the form of tables from the VDOT Drainage Manual
App. 9B-1 LD-2014, App.7B-1 LD-268, App., App. 8B-1 LD-269, etc. -computations are
a basic element, and without them there is no review)
all proposed and existing storm sewer must be shown in plan view
for residential development, principle access free of flooding during the 25yr storm [ 14-
410]
site runoff and entrances do not drain into streets (from VDOT Drainage Manual 9.4.5.2,
9.4.6.2)
concentrated runoff (1 cfs or greater) does not run across travelways/streets (as above'
following VDOT design)
drainage does not run across, through, or backwater in dumpster areas [ 18-4.12.19]
overland relief is provided for any drainage structure or inlet in case of clogging. The
failure of any system will not cause structures, streets or yards to flood. {Policy}
direction of flow change (or deflection angle) in each drainage structure is 90 degrees or
greater (flow should not have to reverse direction) (from guide of VDOT Drainage
Manual 9.4.9.3.2.3)
labels on all drainage structures provided (and should match the drainage computations
and profiles)
provisions and easements for drainage across 3 or more lots. Dense development where
fencing, decking, etc is expected should provide yard inlets and pipes in easements,
rather than ditches {Policy}
Drainage profiles: (applicable to site plans, road and drainage plans) [14-311, 18-32]
drainage profiles for each pipe, structure or channel must contain:
existing ground
proposed ground
any channel linings
all utility crossings
a VDOT designation (MH-1, DI-3B, etc.) for each structure
throat length for each drop inlet
grate type for each grate inlet
a label on each structure to correspond with the computations
Albemarle County
Engineering Drainage Plan Checklist
Page 2 of 2
material and strength class or gage of each pipe
manhole access every 300' for 15"42" or 800' for 48" or greater
pipe slopes at 0.5% min. to 16% max. (per VDOT stnds for anchors over 16%)
concrete inlet shaping (IS-1) specified on any structure with a 4' or greater drop
safety slabs (SL-1) in any structure taller than 12'.
top or rim elevation for each structure
all invert elevations for each structure (with positive flow drop between inverts).
end sections (ES-1) or endwalls (EW-1) on all pipe outlets. Endwalls for culverts 48" or
taller
scour outlet protection at all outlets, corresponding to computations (Green Brook, OP)
Drainage computations: (applicable to any plan proposing pipes, channels, etc.)
Pipe computations for all pipes
All proposed systems are designed within open channel flow capacities. (HGL
computations are not necessary, and should not be relied upon unless the entire
system is to be watertight.)
For systems within drainage easements, all proposed pipes are a minimum 15" in
diameter
_ There are no excessive outlet velocities (> 15fps)
Curb inlet computations for any curb inlets on grade
All spreads are less than 10'
carryover is accounted for
100% capture at entrances so no flow runs out entrances into travel lanes
100% capture, or overland flow of capacity storm, to stormwater management
facilities. Typically stormwater management is designed to the 10year storm, and
inlets on grade cannot capture this.
Curb inlet computations for any curb inlets in sump conditions
All flow depths are below 6" in the capacity table
All spreads are less than 10'
100% capture to stormwater management facilities
Ditch computations for any ditches
ditch linings specified per plans meet velocity requirements
Culvert computations for any culverts
headwaters < 1.5 x culvert height, and 18" below shoulder elevation of streets.
Outlet protection computations for all outlets
dimensions and stone sizes for all outfalls
Proposed pipe and inlet drainage area map
limits of all areas and sub -areas draining to proposed structures, and existing
structures or channels which will be impacted
acreage of each drainage area as used in computations
hydrologic coefficient for each drainage area as used in the computations
time of concentration for each drainage area as used in the computations
destination structure labeled for each drainage area (if not obvious)
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Stephen C. Brich, P.E. 1401 East Broad Street (804) 7862701
Commissioner Richmond, Virginia 23219 Fax: (804) 7862940
July 12, 2021
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Kevin McCollum
Re: Granger Property — Preliminary Plat
SUB-2021-00116
Review # 1
Dear Mr. McCollum:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as prepared by Collins Engineering, dated 7
June 2021, and offers the following comments:
1. Approved road plans meeting SSAR, and in compliance with the VDOT Road Design
Manual are required prior to plat approval.
2. The portion of Sunset Ave Ext (Rte 781) that is prescriptive Right -of -Way should be
dedicated as Public Right -of -Way.
3. Regarding the 61' of Dedicated Public Right -of -Way running from Sunset Ave Ext (Rte
781) north to the property line, does this match the alignment and width required for the
County's development plans?
4. It appears the only practical location for an additional connection is to the future road.
Please provide a stub -out to connect to the proposed future road at a later date.
5. Provide ITE Trip Generation for this development.
6. Please add "No Parking" signs near intersections to prevent parking within the sight
triangles.
7. Provide a plan sheet showing the emergency access road at 1 "=40' scale, and show a
match -line on sheet 7.
8. Provide vertical profiles for all roads.
9. Add this plan note: "Landscaping plants and trees adjacent to 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."
10. Provide intersection sight distance profiles in the sight alignment.
11. Show the radius of the cul-de-sac on Serra Dr. and ensure it complies with Section 4-G of
Appendix 13(1) of the Road Design Manual.
12. Show curb -and -gutter standard to be used on in the Typical Neighborhood Street Section.
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
July 12, 2021
Attn: Kevin McCollum
13. Please remove trees within 30' of intersections as shown in Section 5D of Appendix B(1)
of the Road Design Manual.
14. Provide a landscaping plan.
15. Is the US Postal Service requiring the use of cluster mailboxes? If so, where will they be
located?
16. Provide turn lane warrants for Route 781.
17. Culverts with opening size greater than 36 square feet must be approved by the Culpeper
District Structure & Bridge and Hydraulic Sections; this also includes the proposed
pedestrian tunnel. Typically these approvals are required prior to plan approval, but may
be delayed until acceptance because this was not mentioned in previous reviews. Note
that we do not, however, recommend starting construction on these facilities prior to
Structure & Bridge approval. Also note that these structures require a Geotechnical
report; please see Chapter 3 of the VDOT Manual of Instructions for those requirements.
18. Due to the preliminary nature of this plan, the comments listed may not be exhaustive.
19. 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.
Please provide a digital copy in PDF format of the revised plan along with a comment response
letter. If further information is desired, please contact Doug McAvoy Jr. at (540) 718-6113.
A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The
owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process.
Sincerely,
Adam J. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
APPLICATION#
TMP:
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS - E911
SUB202100116
07600-00-00-02400
DATE: 7/9/21
FROM: Elise Kiewra
ekiewra(caalbemarle.org
Geographic Data Services (GDS)
www.albemarle.org/ads
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3030
The following road names are acceptable:
SOLANO CT
CRESPI BLUFF DR
BALBOA CT
PALOU CT
The following road names are not acceptable:
SERRA DR
Homonym's are not allowed, and Serra sounds exactly like Sara when said out loud.
There is also an existing Sarah Dr already.
Per Part I, Section 4-j of the County's Road Naming and Property Numbering Manual (page 10 of
PDF).
"No proposed name shall be a homophone or homograph of an official road name
or may be easily confused with an official road name (e.g., "Forrestview" and
"Forestvue" are homophones and 'bow" in "Bow and Curtsie Ln" and "Bow Tie"
We recommend providing three (3) candidate names for each road to our office for
review, in case your first choices are not acceptable.
A PDF version of the Ordinance and Manual can be found here:
https://2isweb.albemarle.or2/2isdata/Road Namine and Property Numberm Ordinance and Manu
al.pdf
Please consult the County's Road Name Index to check your road names prior to submittal. The
Index can be found here: https://Ifweb.albemarle.org/Forms/RoadNamelndex
Parcel and mapping information can be found here:
https://Risweb.albemarle.org/gpv 51/ V f ewer. aspxx
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.