HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200800102 Review Comments Final Plat 2008-11-21*-&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Yaniglos, Current Development Project Planner
From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review
Date: 21 November 2008
Subject: Handley Farm Final Plat (SUB- 2008 - 00102)
The final plat for Handley Farm has been reviewed. The following comments are provided.
1. At the time of the expiration of the preliminary plat for this project, the applicant had approved
road, ESC, SWM, and mitigation plans (WPO- 2007 -00047 and SUB - 2006 - 00243). It appears that
the alignment of the road and lot layout is exactly the same as in the approved plans. Therefore,
there are no SWM or road plan concerns for this preliminary plat.
2. The applicant needs to correctly show the stream buffers on the plan. Please refer to the county
GIS -web application for latest buffer locations. The buffer disturbance shown on the plan will be
allowed in accordance with sections 17 -320, 17 -321, and 17 -322 of the Water Protection
Ordinance. A mitigation plan has already been submitted, approved, and bonded.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed. Stream buffers are shown correctly
3. A stream buffer is not needed over the pond in lots 2 and 3.
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed. Stream buffers are shown correctly
4. Please show existing topography, critical slopes, and building sites. [14- 302A9, 14- 302Al2]
(Rev. 1) Comment addressed. A map showing existing topography and critical slopes related to
the building sites was provided as a supplement to the plat set. All critical slope disturbances
were exempt when the preliminary plat was first reviewed under Section 18- 4.2.6.c.
5. (Rev. 1) Comment withdrawn.
6. (Rev. 1) A deed of dedication and easement is needed for all required drainage easements
associated with this final plat. Please refer to the County's website for the most recent forms and
procedural guidelines that need to be followed when submitting a deed of dedication and
easement. The wording shown for the drainage easements on the Deed of Dedication and
Easement needs to be exactly the same as the wording on the final plat. [DMI
(Rev. 2) The language in the deed appears to match the plat. However, the SWM management
and access easement are shown on the wrong pond. See comments below.
(Rev. 3) Comment has been addressed.
7. (Rev. 1) With the required changes, please make sure that the revision date of the revised plat
matches the date of the plat shown on the deed of dedication and easement. [DMI
(Rev. 2)Another submittal of the plat is required because a SWM easement was placed over the
wrong facility. Please be sure the revision date of the plat matches the date mentioned in the deed
of dedication and easement.
(Rev. 3) A revised deed of easement does not appear to be submitted. The latest deed of
easement is dated the 3.d of October and refers to a plat dated "August 18, 2008" and
"...Access and Maintenance Easement on Pond 2 ". All dates should be updated on the deed
and "Pond 2" should be replaced with "Pond 3" as shown on Sheet 9 of 9.
8. (Rev. 1) Drainage easements from the streets must be dedicated to public use. [14 -4311
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
9. (Rev. 1) Please extend all drainage easements to the parent parcel property line or a stream.
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
Current Development
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
10. (Rev. 1) The pond on Parcel 3 is not considered a SWM facility and will not require an easement
and access path.
(Rev. 2) Comment has not been addressed.
(Rev. 3) Comment has been addressed.
11. (Rev. 1) The stormwater management ponds on the residue parcel and lots 2 + 3 will require the
following changes to their easements:
a. Metes and bounds are needed to describe the easement location around both ponds and
their accessways. The "I Oft off of the pond surface level" is not adequate. The
easements should also include other pertinent information like the spillways and
embankments.
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed for the pond on the residue parcel, but an
easement for the pond on lots 2 and 3 has not been shown.
(Rev. 3) Comment has been addressed.
b. The SWM easement on lots 2 and 3 should be shown on sheet 4.
(Rev. 2) Comment has not been addressed.
(Rev. 3) Comment has been addressed.
c. Labels on the final plat for the SWM facilities should match the referenced descriptions in
the deed documents submitted to the county.
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed for the pond on the residue parcel, but an
easement for the pond on lots 2 and 3 has not been shown.
(Rev. 3) Comment has been addressed.
File: E3_fpt_PBC_sub200800102.doc