HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800081 Correspondence 2019-03-08JECT
GEMENT
SHIMP PRO LANDLAND PLAEN NG
ENGINEERING'
C�
March 8, 2019
John Anderson
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP2018.81 Royal Fern Townhomes — Final Site Plan
Mr. Anderson,
Thank you for your review of the Final Site Plan for Royal Fern Townhomes. We have reviewed and revised the plan per your
most recent comments dated December 141h, 2018. Below is a detailed response to each of your comments.
Title of plan is Royal Fern Townhomes, yet Srfe Plan Overview, C3 shows 16 detached residences. Defer to Planning on
whether elements of preliminary subdivision (16 lots) may be mixed with a Final Site Plan, but submitted plan appears to mix
subdivision with site plan elements. Plan title does not fit overview. Recommend revise title.
RESPONSE: Planning has asked us to include the adjacent (TMP 76 46A) site plan information. The single family homes
are not a part of this site plan, only the townhomes.
If this Final Site Plan does not provide details for 16-lot (detached) single-family portion of development, remove this portion of
development from Townhomes site plan.
RESPONSE: Planning (Paty Saternye) has asked us to include the 16-lots. We are open to removing them from the site
plan it is confusing.
3. Provide demolition plan that bridges existing -to -proposed development condition.
a. Label features to be demolished.
J. Provide pavement mill/joint details: provide pavement and drainage typical details.
RESPONSE: a. Demolition Plan included with Existing Conditions sheet.
b. Additional details are provided.
4. Provide relevant civil details for: inlets, MHs, bedding, inlet shaping, roads, alleys, entrances, walks, ramps.
RESPONSE: Provided.
5. Engineering restates initial site plan comment: 'Private streets should follow VDOT and AASHTO regulations, such as a
minimum angle of intersection of 60 degrees. The smaller curb radii shown will need to be verified to be adequate by showing
vehicle turning movements and will also need to be approved by Fire Rescue." Provide vehicle turning movements (Auto -turn
figures for Fire -Rescue vehicles).
RESPONSE: Fire Rescue had no comments concerning turn radii in previous submittal. Vehicle circulation has been
improved. Vehicle turning movements will not be provided.
Revie,v and apply Engineering site plan review checklist to design prior to resubmitting.
RESPONSE: Comment Noted
C2
7. Label all managed slopes.
RESPONSE: Managed slopes are labelled on the Existing Conditions sheet. Managed slopes have been turned off on
Grading Plan for clarity, the hatch makes it difficult to read other aspects of the drawing.
8 Eliminate angled pipe connection at Str. L3.
RESPONSE: Angled Pipe Connection Removed.
9. Label apparent wetland or aquatic features.
RESPONSE: There is no wetland or aquatic feature on TMP 76.54.
10. Show entire limits of proposed new storm conveyance system, to ultimate discharge. Provide drainage easements, as needed,
RESPONSE: This site plan is subject to WPO 201800084. These items shown on the WPO plan.
11. Label Wahoo Way public or private. Label R/W width. Label speed limit of this road.
RESPONSE: Wahoo Way is private, with a 25 MPH speed limit. This is now shown.
C3
12. Provide TMP labels for parcels proposed to be developed, provide ownership data: Name of property owner, and book -page
reference (comment applies to C4 as well).
RESPONSE: Labels have been provided for C3, but not on C4 as to not make Site Plan sheet illegible.
13, Provide TMP labels for adjacent parcels, provide ownership data: Name of property owner, and book -page reference (comment
applies to C4 as well).
RESPONSE: Adjacent TMP labels have been provided on Existing Conditions sheet. Sheet C3 is an overview sheet
provided for clarity, this sheet was suggested to be included by Planning.
14. If 36' wide public road (Road A) is proposed with this Final Site Plan, provide roadway profile.
RESPONSE: Road A is a part of a separate site plan.
15. Provide Road Plan. An approved Road Plan must be built or bonded prior to final site plan approval.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. A Road Plan will be provided.
16. Revise Road B and Alley C designs:
a. Revise angle of intersection to approach right angles. Additional comments reserved for road plan.
b. Intersection approach/exit width:
i. Revise Alley C width to 20 ft; remove one-way designations as 2-way options exist that likely serve an equal
number of townhomes.
c. Provide adequate horizontal separation between driveway apron entrances and alley/road intersections for Lots: T16,
T22, T25, T26, T31. Eliminate 0% 1', 5' horizontal separation. Increase (listed) lot driveway entrance horizontal
clearance to travelway intersection radii returns. Inadequate sight distance impairs movement out of each driveway; it
requires blind maneuvers.
RESPONSE: Roads have been revised. If there is a specific horizontal separation required, please provide resource.
17. Revise private alley labels, to read 'alley' (there are no public alleys).
RESPONSE: Completed.
18. Road B design is illogical. Wahoo Way should be extended to Road A, with consistent width and cross-section that matches the
existing Wahoo Way,
RESPONSE: Road network has altered to better serve the townhomes.
19. Road B at point it turns off Wahoo Way to serve townhome units, should be re -labeled; for example, Road C.
RESPONSE: Roads have change layout and names.
2
20. Recommend increase offset distance, corner of T31 to edge of sidewalk.
RESPONSE: Offset distance has been increased around townhomes.
C4
21, Provide typical labels (partial list):
a. Street name signs
b. Traffic control signs
c. Curb type (CG-2, CG-6, CG-12, etc.)
RESPONSE: a. street name signs provided.
b. Traffic control signs, such as 'One Way' and `No Parking' signs provided.
c. Curb types were previously provided, and are still on the site plan.
22, Label walkway width. Provide minimum 5' width
RESPONSE: Walkway width is the same as sidewalk, 5', as shown on the site plan.
23, Provide true graphic representation of CG-12, matching VDOT standard for CG-12 for radial curb.
RESPONSE: CG-12's will be altered to match VDOT standards.
24. Provide CG-12 on east side of north end of Alley C.
RESPONSE: Additional CG-12's have been provided across site.
25. Ensure sidewalk grade does not exceed 5% grade.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Sidewalk slopes will be kept to a minimum. It is important to note that
Charlottesville/Albemarle is in Virginia's Piedmont, a region characterized by its mountainous, hilly, and rocky
landscape and as such, roads (and therefore the sidewalks required), frequently exceed 5% grade.
26, Provide turnarounds at every proposed dead end: or preferably, eliminate dead ends.
RESPONSE: The roads have been redesigned to leave only one dead end. A parking striped area and road bump out
have been provided to allow easier vehicle turn around. Since the length of this alley stub is only 150' long, vehicles
can easily reverse Length = 420', Turnaround not required
27, Revise CG-12 ramps at Road B-Alley A intersection to align perpendicularly.
RESPONSE: The ramp at Road B where it intersect with the existing Wahoo Way has been rotated perpendicularly.
28, If multiple curb types proposed, show and label curb -curb transitions.
RESPONSE: Curb transitions have been labelled.
C5
29. Label roads and alleys.
RESPONSE: Provided
30 Show and label existing right-of-way, 5'h Street.
RESPONSE: Provided on Setback and Sight Distance sheet.
31. Show and label existing easement or right-of-way, Wahoo Way.
RESPONSE: Provided on Setback and Sight Distance sheet.
32. Show sight lines. Provide sight distance easements where sight lines extend onto lots (Int. Road B- Road B).
RESPONSE: Provided on Setback and Sight Distance sheet.
33. Center easements on travelways: for example, 30' access easement for private road B does not provide a 30' functional width.
RESPONSE: It is not a requirement for the easements to be centered on the travelway.
34. Although internal network road design will be revised to meet to VDOT and ACDSM standards, alley easements cannot be
clearly traced. Ensure easements are clearly defined. and cover all travelways.
RESPONSE: An additional sheet has been provided to help clarify the easements. Additional sheets/documentation can
be provided if there is still confusion.
C6
35. Ensure sidewalks grades are ADA-compliant.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
C7
36. Label TMPs
RESPONSE: Provided
37. WPO Plan has been submitted (WPO201800084): revise site plan consistent with WPO plan review comments.
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
38. Label proposed underground detention feature.
RESPONSE: Underground detention feature labels provided.
39. Eliminate grate only inlet type in paved areas; provide VDOT standard drop inlets.
RESPONSE: This is not required. Grates provided only where deemed necessary.
40. Provide drainage calculations on the final site plan.
a. Provide LD-204 (stormwater inlet design)
b. Provide LD-229 (stormwater pipe design)
RESPONSE: a. Provided on WPO.201800084.
b. Provided on WPO.201800084.
41. More comments possible when Road Plan is submitted.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
C10
42 Provide profiles for all roads.
RESPONSE: Road profiles provided.
43. Provide UDs at cuUfill transitions.
VDOT CD-1 Underdrains provided. See updated profiles.
44. Reference Road Plan review checklist.
RESPONSE: Noted. This governs Road plans, although many overlapping information will be shown.
C12
45. Label storm inlet structures, use VDOT designations (DI-3, for example).
RESPONSE: Provided
46 More comments possible when Road Plan is submitted.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged
If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to email me at Keane(cDshimp-engineehng.com
or you may contact Justin Shimp at JustinfcDshimp-enaineerina.com or (434) 227-5140.
Best Regards,
Keane Rucker, EIT
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
5