HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202100066 Correspondence 2022-01-05608 Preston Avenue P 434.295.5624
Site 200 IF434.295.1800
T I M M O N S GROUP
Charlottesville, VA 22903 www.timmons.com
January 5, 2022
Rebecca Ragsdale
Development Process Manager
County of Albemarle
Community Development
401 McIntire Rd
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP-2021-66 —Southwood —Blocks 9, 10, & 11— FSP -Comment Response Letter
Dear Ms. Ragsdale:
We have reviewed your comments from November 28, 2021 and made the necessary revisions.
Please find our responses to the comments below in bold lettering.
Outstanding Initial Site Plan Comments:
1. [32.5.2(b); 32.5.2(q)] The trip generation should be cumulative, revise to include prior
blocks similar to what is requested above for units, 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.
Rev. 1 : Comment not addressed. Include those site plans that are under review and/or
approved in the chart.
The trip generation table has been updated on Sheet C0.0 to accurately summarize the
trip generation for this project phase and previous phases.
Rev. 2): Comment not fully addressed. Table does not include Blocks 11 and 12. Also,
information for Phase 2 is not accurate based on what is proposed with ZMA2021-13.
Per our discussion, the total trip generation table has been removed (Table 3). In
addition the cumulative trip generation table has been expanded to include all of
Phase 1 and is provided no the cover sheet.
2. [32.5.2(b); 4.12.6] Condense the parking information into x number required and x
number provided. 86 townhomes require 2.25 spaces/unit, this equates to 194 total
spaces required and only 183 are being provided. Additional parking spaces are
required, or a parking modification/reduction will need to be submitted and approved
ENGINEERING I DESIGN I TECHNOLOGY
by the zoning administrator. Having a condensed table will allow planning and code
compliance officers to quickly see how many are provided on the lots/garages and those
on the street. See example below:
• 86 townhomes: 194 spaces required, X spaces provided in garages/lots, X spaces
provided on street/alley. X ADA spaces.
In addition, show the garages on the site plan to show whether there are 2 car garages,
or 1 car and the dimensions of the garages to ensure that the required size for parking
spaces is being met.
Parking information table has been updated and condensed accordingly. Interior
garages are also outlined and dimensioned within the site plan as requested.
Rev. 1 : Comment partially addressed. The total count provided in the location column
doesn't match what is shown in the required column.
Total parking count table has been updated, the total count in the location column has
been updated to correctly account for the parking provided. Per the COD, 1.5 spaces
per dwelling unit are required in Blocks 9-12.
Rev. 2 : Comment not fully addressed. Code of development indicates a minimum of
1.5 spaces/unit in Blocks 11-12. Indicate this parking calculation in the table and
reference the modification and COD standard. Clarify that parking requirements are met
for townhouse units with 2-car garages and also driveway spaces.
Calculations and notes have been updated to reference the 1.5 space/unit
modification approved for blocks 9-12 as shown on page 9 of the approved Code of
Development. The garage and driveway spaces have also been more clearly identified
in the parking required/provided table on sheet C0.1.
Show Swallowtail consistent with SDP202100071 plan sheets. Indicate on -street parking
is required for minimum parking in Block 11. Is the road private? A private street
request will need to be made and information should be provided in accordance with
14-234 with the subdivision plat for the road. Please note, private roads are the
exception and a justification as to why it cannot be public must be made. Response
letter with SDP202100071 indicates that Swallowtail will be public. Update all plan
sheets to clearly indicate that proposed streets are to be public and make sure ROW is
labeled for each.
Plans have been updated to consistently show that Swallowtail Ln is private. A letter
with a justification for a private road is included with this resubmission.
3. [32.5.2(e); 32.7.9.4; 32.7.9.8] In order for the existing trees to count towards canopy,
more information needs to be provided. See the section in 32 regarding existing
landscape features and the requirements. In addition, trees and canopy located in the
right of way along Old Lynchburg Road cannot count towards the canopy calculation
requirement, only those trees within the property.
Trees that are in question of being not within the property boundary have been
removed for the canopy calculation.
Rev. 1 : Provide the information under 32.7.9.4(b) regarding the landscaping being used
for existing canopy. Conservation checklist needs to be filled out and signed by the
owner. The area needs to be shown on the grading plan along with the protective
fencing shown on the WPO/E&S Plan. Identify what types of trees are located here,
evergreen, deciduous, or a mix of type.
The limits of disturbance as well as the tree protection areas have been shown on the
sheet 1-1.1 and 1-1.2. Only this area of existing trees, which is a mix of existing
deciduous and evergreen trees, will be used towards the tree canopy requirement, the
remainder of the canopy required will come from proposed trees.
Rev. 2 : Not fully addressed. Existing trees to remain have only been indicated on
landscape plan sheets and not all other sheets, including grading plans, as requested by
previous comment. The table provided on Sheet L2.0 does not include a breakdown of
the tree canopy calculations.
The canopy amounts have been added in the plant schedule on sheet L2.0.
4. [Code of Development, page 16] The landscaping required for the Pedestrian
Connection Areas are not being provided. Provide the required trees and landscaping
for these areas. In addition, the required 10' width/access easement for these areas is
not being provided.
Pedestrian Access Easements have been adjusted to be 10' wide. The required
plantings for the pedestrian connection areas have been added on sheets 1-1.0, 1.1.1,
1-1.2. A chart showing the requirement has been added to sheet L2.0.
Rev. 1 : Required shrubs are not being shown/provided. Update the landscape plan in
accordance with what is required under the COD.
The required plantings for the pedestrian connection areas per the COD have been
added on sheets 1-1.0, 1-1.1, 1.1.2. A chart showing the requirement has been added to
sheet L2.0.
Rev .2 : Are the required shrubs and flowering trees included in the plant schedule on
Sheet L2.0?
Yes, the plant schedule is located on sheet L2.0.
5. [Code of Development; Application Plan; 32.5.2] Identify and label the trail buffer more
clearly on all sheets.
The trail buffer has been identified on Sheets C4.0-C4.2.
Rev. 1 : Include the width of the trail buffer on the labeled area.
Trail buffer width has been added to Sheets C4.0-C4.2 where the buffer width is at its
30' minimum requirement per the COD.
Rev. 2 : Partially met. The comment was to label the trail buffer clearly on all sheets.
1-0-1-2 are not clearly labeled. Also, there are areas not defined within the trail buffer as
to whether there is existing vegetation or replanting proposed. Based on other sheets,
additional replanted areas are needed that are not shown.
As discussed on the 12/10 zoom call the areas of disturbance to install the trail are
proposed to be replanted. In areas of the existing VDOT horizontal sight distance
easement along Old Lynchburg Rd the plantings have been proposed in the closest
possible vicinity to the trail buffer. In addition, we have included some imagery of the
trail buffer at the end of this comment response letter to illustrate existing trees
within the ROW and outside of our Limits of Disturbance that will be protected along
Old Lynchburg Rd. The tree protection fencing and callouts have also been added to
the grading and drainage plans (C5.0-05.2) to increase visibility of the tree protection
measures to the contractor. Additional buffer callouts have been added to the
landscaping plans.
6. [32.5.2(n)] Provide the dimensions for all existing and proposed improvements on the
layout plan. Including: walkways, fences, walls, parking lots, parking spaces (including
garage spaces), other paved areas, driveways, etc. In addition, provide the material
types for all walks parking lots, and driveways.
All existing and proposed improvements have been properly dimensioned on Sheets
C4.0-C4.2. Legends have been provided on Sheets C4.0-C4.2 to identify the material
types for all parking lots and driveways.
Rev. 1 : The length of the driveways should be a minimum of 18' to provide adequate
area for parking. Providing anything less will encourage residents to park there and then
part of their vehicle will be blocking the travel way and emergency access. This has been
a problem in other developments. Adjust the units so that 18 feet can be maintained.
The dimension previously shown on the plans was from the edge of driveway to the
property line — the actual dimension of each driveway is 18' (min.). The plans have
been updated to call out the driveway lengths more clearly.
7. [32.5.2(n)] For the townhome units in Lots 71 and 72-16 units, how will trash be
provided/collected? Will there be a dumpster? If there will be a trash area, show where
that area is located and if a dumpster is needed/proposed, it will need to meet the
requirements of 4.12.19.
A dumpster has been added to Sheet C4.0 to serve the two apartment buildings.
Rev. 1 : Provide the dimensions to ensure adequate area is provided under 4.12.19. In
addition, screening needs to be provided in accordance with 32.7.9.7.
Dimension callouts have been added to the dumpster location. Screening shrubs have
been added to the dumpster area and are shown on sheet 1.1.1.
Rev. 2 : The minimum standards for screening are not met. A fenced enclosure is
needed to provide screening on all side of the dumpster.
The location for the screening fence is shown on sheet 1-1.1. The detail for the
screening fence is shown on sheet C3.2.
8. [32.5.2(1)] There are overhead utilities shown within the grading areas, trail, and trail
buffer area. How will these utilities be treated? Will they be put underground? Will the
poles need to be relocated?
Dominion will be relocating these utilities underground under a separate project. This
linework has been incorporated into these plans for reference and information only.
The undergrounding work will be performed by Dominion under separate permits.
Rev. 1 : What will the easement area width be for the lines underground? Show the
easement that is required. Dominion has specific requirements regarding
improvements, including landscaping and sidewalks and grading, within their easement.
This needs to be coordinated and improvements may need to be adjusted as necessary
and may require site plan amendments.
Dominion easements have been added to the plan for reference only as Dominion
prepares their own deeds/plat and records their own easements. This is a separate
process from the county easement process. As can be seen on sheets C4.3-C4.5, the
only Dominion easements on these blocks is a 10' easement at the back of ROW along
the north side of Horizon Rd. All of the undergrounding work along Old Lynchburg is
within VDOT ROW and as such does not require specific easements. It is understood
Dominion has specific requirements within their standard easement agreements,
which we have pasted below. It is understood and acknowledged by our client
(Habitat) that we are planning to put sidewalks and landscaping in some areas of the
Dominion easements, and it is possible Dominion could in the future remove these
improvements and not replace them, which would then be the burden of the owners
to replace.
Alternatively, if improvements or landscaping are within the easement, a letter from
Dominion could be provided that states those improvements are permitted. If the
easement area is not known at this time, the existing easement must be shown and the
above comments regarding improvements within the easement.
See the language below included in the right of way agreement with Dominion:
structure, or other above ground obstruction on the easement, provided, however, GRANTOR may
construct on the easement fences, landscaping (subject, however, to GRANTEE's rights in Paragraph
4 of this Right of Way Agreement), paving, sidewalks, curbing, gutters, street signs, and below ground
obstructions as long as said fences, landscaping, paving, sidewalks, curbing, gutters, street signs, and
below ground obstructions do not interfere with GRANTEE's exercise of any of its rights granted
hereunder. In the event such use does interfere with GRANTEE'S exercise of any of its rights granted
In addition, some of the existing tree canopy that is being shown as preserved to count
towards the minimum may be impacted by this project and additional landscaping will
need to be provided to address the tree canopy requirements.
The utility relocation is outside of the limits of the existing tree canopy and will not
impact the canopy requirements. Our landscape plan only accounts for a small
amount of area to be preserved for canopy requirements and clearly demonstrates
this area to be protected from all construction activities including work by Dominion.
Rev. 2 : Partially addressed. 10' easement along northside of Horizon Drive is shown. All
other easements are indicated to be in VDOT ROW. No direct communication from
Dominion was provided but typical easement language was included in comment letter.
Was this addressed in other plan reviews such as road plans?
As discussed on our zoom call on 12/10 the onsite dominion power easements are
shown on sheets C4.9-C4.11 and no further plan changes are required to satisfy this
comment. The applicant has coordinated all requirements with Dominion for service
and those requirements have been incorporated into each phase with our designs.
Dominion infrastructure within the VDOT ROW is permitted separately by Dominion
and is under the direct control of Dominion on how and where they intend to run their
lines within the VDOT ROW in their coordination with VDOT.
9. Please note that if outdoor lighting is proposed, full cut off fixtures are required over
3,000 lumens and for final site plan a photometric plan and cutsheets of the fixtures are
required.
Photometric plans have been provided. See Sheets E1.042.0.
Rev.1 : LLF needs to be 1.0. Update photometric plan accordingly. Also, the dumpster is
shown at a different location on the lighting plan from the other sheets. Coordinate the
plan sheets.
Photometric plans have been updated accordingly.
Rev .2 : Photometric plan sheets are not provided for all blocks.
As discussed on our zoom call on 12/10 the photometric plans are only included for
the condo buildings as this is the only area with streetlights in Blocks 9-11 and no
further plan change are required to satisfy this comment.
10. [Code of Development, page 16; 4.16] Show/indicate what facilities will be provided in
the amenity spaces and playground.
Rev. 1 : Provide detailed information on the playground equipment proposed. Per the
COD this is to be decided at site plan (page 16).
The following note has been added to sheet L1.0 & L1.2:
"THE PLAYGROUND SHALL BE THE ALLREC SYNERGY SY-3013 WITH A MULCH BASE, OR
AN APPROVED EQUIVALENT"
Rev. 2 : The comment is partially addressed. While the playground specification have
been provided by reference, the minimum equipment is not listed in the plan set and
must be included. Looking up the reference on-line, it does not meet minimum
requirements of Section 4.16 (below). Also, refer to the attached recreational
modification and minimum requirements.
The playground equipment has been included on sheet L2.1. The playground area has
been expanded to ensure that the equipment fits within the playground area as
shown on L2.1.
Final Site Plan Comments:
1. Easements and open space with the lots will need to be platted via a subdivision plat
application which is a separate review and approval.
Acknowledged.
2. The boundary line adjustment that is a part of SUB2021-036 will need to be approved
and recorded prior to final site plan approval for these blocks. The plan will then need to
be updated to reflect the adjust parcels.
Acknowledged.
CDD Engineering Comments — Matthew Wentland — 11-28-2021:
1. The VSMP plan will need to be approved prior to Final Site Plan approval. Review of the
VSMP plan may generate additional comments on the Final Site Plan.
Acknowledged.
2. The road plan will need to be approved prior to Final Site Plan approval. Review of the
road plan may generate additional comments on the Final Site Plan.
Acknowledged.
3. Provide sight distance triangles and profiles for travelway interactions. These can be
reduced with a waiver where all vehicles are required to stop. (Design Standards Manual
7.C.1, 18.4.12.15d, 18.4.12.17d).
Sight distance triangles and profiles have been provided for travelway intersections.
Fire Rescue Comments — Howard Lagomarsino— 11-28-2021:
No objection.
E911 — 11-28-2021:
See attached letter.
Road names have been updated correctly on the landscaping plans and coordinated
via email with Elise Kiewra.
CDD Comments — Betty Slough — 11-28-2021:
1. Comments will be forwarded once provided.
No comments received so it is assumed there are no further CDD comments
V DOT — Adam Moore — 11-28-2021:
No objection.
ACSA — Alexander Morrison—11-28-2021:
Comments were sent directly to applicant.
Comments have been coordination directly with ACSA.
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 .
SincereI ,
Bryan Cichocki, PE
Project Manager
G ,kEetln
411*
��\ J 114
!A
lei tT ( � .'III• , !1 t }'u
r 't+
. 3e1F 4