Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201400060 Review Comments 2014-04-07Review Comments Project Name: Appleberry Farm Subdivision - Final Final Plat Date Completed: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 Reviewer: Johnathan Newberry Department /Division /Agency: Planning Reviews John informed me on 6 -24 that the additional information submitted by the applicant showed the road now meets the 3 -5 lot standard. Applicant also paid additional fee. Review Status: Approved Review Comments Project Name: Appleberry Farm Subdivision - Final Final Plat Date Completed: Imonday, June 23, 2014 Reviewer: Johnathan Newberry Department /Division /Agency: Planning Reviews Surveyor revised the plat and I emailed Mr. Wakefield with remaining comments: 1. Get confirmation that road meets the 3 -5 lot standard 2. Pay Tier II groundwater fee Review Status: Requested Changes �pF A �'717G1L31P COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 Project: Plan coordinator: Owner or rep.: Plan received date Date of comments Reviewer: SUB201400060 Appleberry Farm Subdivision, Final Jonathan Newberry, Planning James Wakefield 20 May 2014 23 May 2014 John Anderson Re: Private Street, 3 -5 lot standard {Albemarle County Code Ch. 14 § 412.A.2.(a)} Survey performed by Edward D. Campbell, dated May 19, 2014 (File: 4607), shows a portion of Appleberry Farm Road. If 1.5' of material (suitable fill, and 1 -2" stone) is added to the road surface at the low point shown on the survey and blended smoothly in either direction to raise curve elevation, then, with roadway widening (to 14') and stone surface (1 -2 "), the existing drive will meet the 3 -5 lot private street standard at all points between SR 630 and 4990 Appleberry Farm Road (Entrance to James Wakefield residence). Please do not hesitate to ask if you have any questions. Thank you. File: SUB201400060- Appleberry Farm Subdiv Final- 052214- rev052314 Review Comments Project Name: Appleberry Farm Subdivision - Final Final Plat Date Completed: Friday, May 23, 2014 Reviewer: Johnathan Newberry Department /Division /Agency: Planning Reviews Sent an email to Mr. Wakefield with the comments from John on the road survey. Review Status: Requested Changes County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: James Wakefield (linwake@aol.com) CC: Michael Wakefield (JMichaelWakefield @gmail.com) From: J.T. Newberry (jnewberrykalbemarle.org) Division: Planning Date: April 30, 2014 Subject: SUB201400060 Appleberry Farm Subdivision — Final Plat The Planner will recommend approval of the plat referred to above when the following items 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.) Planning 1. [Section 14- 203(G)] A Tier II Groundwater Assessment is required by Section 14- 308.1. Please submit the required $330 fee to complete this requirement. 2. [General Comment] Under the "Zoning" heading, please remove the notes related to the Entrance Corridor overlay district and Flood Hazard overlay district. 3. [Section 14- 302(B)(7)] Please remove the note related to the Green Creek watershed. This subdivision is not located in a water supply protection area, so please state that this land "is not within a water supply watershed." 4. [Section 14- 302(B)(10)] Please refer to the attached GIS map. It appears that WPO buffers do exist within the area proposed to be subdivided. If this is correct, please show the buffers and add the statement from this section as a note to the plat. If this is not the case, then please disregard this comment. 5. [Section 14- 303(A)] Please update the statement of consent to division under the Owner's Approval to match the language shown in this section. 6. [Section 14- 303(D)] Please show the acreage of Tax Map 118, Parcel 29A. 7. [Section 14 -209, Section 14- 234(C)(1), Section 14- 412(A)(2)] Following a site visit with John Anderson (Engineering Division) on April 23rd, it was determined that Appleberry Farm Road does not currently meet all of the standards for streets serving three to five lots. Appleberry Farm Road must demonstrate that it meets these standars prior to final plat approval. Please contact J.T. Newberry at 434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3270 or jnewberrykalbemarle.org for further information about the comments above. Engineering 1. [Section 14- 412(A)(2)(a)] Appleberry Farm Road does not meet the standards for streets serving three to five lots. A road survey or road plans may be necessary to demonstrate the road meets the minimum design requirements (see the attached Private Road Acceptance Procedure for more information). The minimum design requirements that were found to be insufficient (or inconclusively sufficient) include, but are not limited to: a. Travelway width (14 foot minimum) b. Shoulder width (3 foot minimum) c. Minimum crest curve K value (minimum K = 5) 2. [Section 14 -435] Road must be built to standard or bonded for construction prior to final plat approval. Please follow this link for information about the bonding process. If you have additional questions, please contact Ana Kilmer at 434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3246. Please contact John Anderson at 434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3069 or janderson2kalbemarle.org for further information about the comments above. Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources Apnl 29, 2014 Legend (Note: Some items on map may not appear in legend) 624-ft— - -.i G'Aittcoairea B couECEniHrvEivsm o F RE RES UE SrA, oe osPaN. bpd 118 -29A J ! t Pos,orn<E as oo,oNRaRSM o '°o Pa aa r 1 E °a aoo ore re 612 ft s 118 -29 y;. TM: 116 � � Ti rory� 4990, t �, e l 11�8;30C y8� g0 . (D 626624 -ft J f 620 -ft 118 -301 ��. 182 ft CP uy IN 6 £ 08. yor .ar -er GIS -Web Geographic Data Services www.albemarle.org (434) 296 -5832 Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources Apnl 29, 2014 Albemarle County Private Road Acceptance Procedure This is the procedure developed by the Albemarle County Community Development Department for the completion of private roads. The items in this list must be completed in the order given. 1. Tests and Inspections: Have all necessary tests and inspections performed by a professional engineer or geotech, or VDOT certified inspector. This should include, at a minimum, a. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests, b. stone depth inspections, including installation of under- drains and cross - drains, c. fill compaction tests, d. pipe and drainage structure video inspections or equivalent, e. base and surface pavement inspections, documenting materials, thickness and compaction 2. 3. L concrete tests g. structural and related inspections for any bridges and foundations Compile a report of these tests, certified by a professional engineer, and submit this report with the as -built plans. As -built plans and plats: Provide drawings of the constructed improvements according to the Albemarle County As -built Road Plan Policy. Provide copies of all recorded drainage easements, sight easements, and right -of -way plats. Plats should be copies of the actual recorded documents from the Clerk's office. Before completing as -built drawings, make any corrections necessary to ensure all improvements are within right -of -ways and easements. Bond inspection: Request a bond reduction or release inspection from the County, which will reduce or release your bond, indicating completion or partial completion, or generate a letter indicating items in need of documentation or completion. The following documents will be needed with your bond inspection request; A. Completed Bond Inspection Request form and fee A form and fee are required for each bond, such as for a project with multiple phases and bonds. B. As -built documents per items 1 and 2 above. An as -built plan prepared in accordance with the County's As -Built Road Plan Policy is required. For any releases or reductions, the minimum requirements of this policy must be met, if only to ensure that all improvements are in right -of -way and easements. C. Signed and sealed letter from a professional engineer listed and certifying that completed improvements are built according to plan. Please do not e-mail or fax copies of this letter. An original signature and certifying seal are required. Please do not use qualifying statements such as "it appeared ", or "to the best of my knowledge ", or "generally in accord ". Improvements were either built to plan, or they were not. As -built measurements, construction inspections, and other field verifications should be cited and included. Tolerances should be noted. The items not built according to plan must be listed, with explanations. Deviation in pavement materials and thicknesses must be listed. If street trees or sidewalks, or other items were moved, or added, this should be noted. If drainage changed, by addition or deletion of culverts, inlets, or re- alignments of pipes or grades, this should be verified by revised computations and attached to the letter. If there are outstanding items or omissions, these should be listed. Graphics are helpful. In short, please provide more than a statement of opinion or assurance. Please demonstrate that the improvements and construction have been inspected, investigated and documented, and are certified in detail, and county staff will not be in the position of discovering discrepancies and deficiencies in the field. D. Completed Certificate of Completion This form must be received for release of a bond. It is available on the county website. In the case of reductions, a letter listing the outstanding items that need to be completed before signing the certification is acceptable. It must be signed by the owner. This form says all subdivision improvements have been completed. It also says that all construction conforms to approved plans and any discrepancies have been approved by the County. Review Comments Project Name: Appleberry Farm Subdivision - Final Final Plat Date Completed: IThursday, April 24, 2014 Reviewer: John Anderson Department /Division /Agency: Engineering Reviews Appleberry Farm Rd, from SR 630 to the point it serves 1 -2 lots, does not at present meet 3 -5 lot pvt. street standard for rural areas [AC § 14 -412, A.2.a.], which requires 14 -ft min travelway width, 3 -ft min shoulder widths, and a minimum of 4 -ft from the edge of the shoulder to the ditch centerline. (based upon field measurements, 4- 23 -14, JA -JN). VDOT stopping sight distance requirements also apply. -ref DOC e1 Update - Site visit, 4- 28 -14, ACCD (J. Anderson), VDOT Area Land Use Engineer, Troy Austin: Rte 630 is posted 35 mph. Low - volume commercial entrance 250 -ft stopping sight distance applies. To south, measured stopping distance is slightly <250 -ft (branches); to north, >250 -ft. With respect to future development, a sixth lot would trigger VDOT intersection sight distance requirement, 390 -ft, which does not exist, north or south. With this application, 3 -5 lot pvt. street standard applies. Appleberry Farm Rd does not meet the 3 -5 lot standard, and survey is required to calculate K, =5, crest curves. It is difficult to calculate (possible to estimate) K without a survey. K is questionable at one crest curve (4 -23 site review). Slopes do not exceed 7% between Rte. 630 and 4990 Appleberry Farm Rd, applicant's residence. Review Status: Requested Changes John Anderson From: John Anderson Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 4:07 PM To: Johnathan Newberry Cc: Glenn Brooks; Troy Austin Subject: RE: Appleberry Farm protest J.T. Thanks for your note. I spoke with Troy Austin this afternoon. He explained that VDOT stopping sight distance for low- volume commercial entrances ( >2 residences, shared roadway) would apply in this case. For non - posted state secondary roads (55mph), this distance is 495 ft. I do not think the existing intersection of Appleberry Farm and Green Creek Rd meets this standard. I will re -visit the site with Troy (VDOT, Area Land Use Engineer) Apr -28 to collect more definite information relative to Albemarle County (AC) Code [AC § 14 -412, A.2.a.], VDOT standards, and SUB201400060. Please note that AC Design Standards Manual —Engineering (220ct2012); AC Road Inspections & Acceptance (11 -01- 11); VDOT Road Design Manual, Appendix F, Access Management Design Standards for Entrances and Intersections will (or may) apply should Mr. Wakefield's subdivision application proceed. Yesterday, we obtained preliminary information: Appleberry Farm Road (existing): WIDTH — 9' transitioning to wheel tracks GRAVEL surface GRADE < 7 %* * All locations (per digital level) from SR 630 to entrance (not shown) to residence shown on plat titled Subdivision Plat, Wakefield Division, Parcel "Y ", 7.87 Acres, April 01, 2014 (Ex. House, Parcel "Y ", 4990 Appleberry Farm Rd, Schuyler, VA -James Wakefield) ENTRANCE at Green Creek Rd (SR 630): WIDTH — 25' ENTR PIPE — 15 "CMP, L = 30' HORIZ SIGHT distance (measured at 10' from EP, SR 630) — 250' (±), each direction, N -S. ( Will evaluate HORIZ SIGHT at 14.5' from EP, SR 630, Apr -28, with VDOT Area Engineer) Thank you, J.T. John Anderson, PE Community Development Albemarle County 434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3069 From: Johnathan Newberry Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 1:12 PM To: John Anderson Subject: FW: Appleberry Farm protest Hi John, As I develop a response to Mr. Wakefield's message, I may ask for your assistance. I just wanted to give you a heads up. Thanks, J.T. From: linwake @aol.com [mailtodinwake@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 10:36 AM To: Johnathan Newberry; JMichaelWakefield @gmail.com Subject: Appleberry Farm protest TO: Mr. J.T. Newberry, From: James R. Wakefield Dear Mr. Newberry April 24, 2014 My family and I believe the Albemarle County Zoning Code has been unfairly applied to us. We are an aging couple and desire to sell our resident home with a necessary parcel of land, move to a more suitable location in our remaining years and leave the remainder of our farm (which our family has owned and paid taxes on since 1929) to our children. We bought easements and built a roadway to our property to ease and get away from traffic on Appleberry Lane roadway, which at the time had some nine families using a one lane road on a judges' prescribed 20 foot easement. As we understand our situation, we can sell our entire farm and do nothing to our roadway and there will be two families using the roadway, or if we could have a necessary parcel of our land to sell with our home we would still have two families using the roadway. In either case there will be two families using the roadway as presently installed. We do not know the cost of revising the roadway to meet subdivision requirement. Our experience in building roads tells us we simply cannot afford to upgrade one half mile of roadway. This letter is to request the County to grant us the right to sell our 8.87 acres with our home and leave the roadway as is. We see this as selling part of our property with certain rights that we have earned. We are not effectively changing the use of the roadway, or adding a lot that could be developed as a building site with additional road usage as a granted development division would. We also request written confirmation that my son who has a family division not be required to rebuild a roadway before he can sell his property. James R. Wakefield cc Michael Wakefield