HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO200900020 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2009-09-04� OF AL
,. vIRGI1`IZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
Project: University Village, Phase 1; SDP - 2009 - 00033, WPO- 2009 -00020
Plan preparer: Mr. Scott Collins; Collins Engineering
Owner or rep.: Next Generation, LLC
Plan received date: 27 April 2009
Revl: 6 Aug 2009 (activated 19 Aug with the ZMA variation approval)
Date of comments: 19 May 2009
Rev l: 3 Sep 2009
Reviewer: Phil Custer, Glenn Brooks (Rev. 1)
The final site and road plans for Phase 1 of the University Village Retirement Community project, received
on 27 April 2009, have received engineering review. The applicant has requested that the site plan be
reviewed under the Zoning Ordinance at the time of the rezoning approval (ZMA- 1977 -019). A sedate
Stefmwater- Management Plans. (Rev. 1: The erosion control and stormwater plans were withdrawn for the
initial submittal, and no review took place.)
A. Final Site Plan [SDP- 2009 - 00033]
1. Please show the benchmark in the plan set. [32.4.35]
Rev. 1: not found
2. The road crossing will require fill in the floodplain and, therefore, a special use permit will be
necessary. A site plan can not be approved for this project without the SP for fill in the floodplain.
[30.3]
Rev. 1: taken off plan.
3. All handicap parking spaces must be 12ft wide. [4.12.6.5]
Rev. 1: OK
4. The site plan shows disturbance to an undisturbed buffer on the rezoned commercial portion of the
property for the construction of a sewer line. Please request a waiver of this buffer and it will be
taken to the Planning Commission.
Rev. 1: This item is handled by planning.
5. Please move the parking spaces and garages farther south so that the sidewalk along the road can
not be blocked by parked cars.
Rev. 1: OK
6. The pipe systems on the site plan sheets (S) and drainage plan sheets (DP) show different
alignment and networks. Please correct.
Rev. 1: OK
7. A drainage structure is needed on University Lane across from structure 50.
Rev. 1: OK
8. Please call out a VDOT Safety Slab for structure 113.
Rev. 1: OK
9. Please provide VDOT Inlet Shaping on all inlets where flow drops 4ft (either from a pipe or from
the surface).
Rev. 1: OK
Current Development
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 3
10. On -grade curb inlet calculations appear to be incorrect. For every inlet, a longitudinal slope of
0.5% is used for the computation.
Rev. 1: The slopes have been corrected, but inlets in the median are computed as though a gutter
were in place, which is not the design.
11. The site plan cannot be approved until all elements of the WPO plan are approved. Comments
regarding the ESC and SWM plans will be given in a separate letter.
Rev. 1: see WPO review
12. This project is located outside the jurisdictional area for public water and sewer service but within
the development area boundary. The jurisdictional area is currently being updated by the Planning
Department.
Rev. 1: County records indicate this property does not receive public water or sewer service.
B. Road Plan [WPO- 2009 - 00020]
1. VDOT approval is required.
Rev. 1: no correspondence has been received from VDOT.
2. A road bond must be posted prior to approval of the site plan. The applicant must provide an item
by item breakdown from a contractor for the construction of all public improvements. This cost
estimate will be subject to the review of the County Engineer. [32.5.2]
Rev. 1: All of Boulders Road out to Rt. 29 must be bonded and right -of -way dedicated. Currently,
there are no bonds in place, or right -of -way.
3. The radius of the cul -de -sac must be a minimum of 50ft. [32.5.9]
Rev. 1: As Builders Road must be built to current VDOT standards for acceptance now anyway, I
am removing this requirement. This road is for VDOT acceptance, and it is their call.
4. The pavement section details do not match for all roads between the individual detail and summary
table and the road cross section detail.
Rev. 1: OK
5. Please reduce the cut and fill for the roadway between Sta. 19 +00 and Sta. 28 +00 so that critical
slope disturbance is minimized. A waiver for critical slope disturbance will be required in areas
where critical slopes disturbance could be reasonably avoided if the start of the fill or cut was
brought closer to the right -of -way.
Rev. 1: See WPO review, which changes this area anyway.
6. The crossing of the perennial stream must be designed at this time, preferably, in conjunction with
the review of a Special Use Permit. The crossing should be designed so that the plan is in
conformity with the approved rezoning plan; a lake should be created with the roadway fill unless
a variation is given by the Director of Planning. Future comments may be required on the road
plan due to changes necessary to meet crossing requirements.
Rev. 1: I have concerns that this rezoning plan cannot be built. The lake will likely not be allowed
by state and federal regulators, as environmental regulation has changed since 1977. Just leaving
this portion of the road and development off the current plan does not fully address this concern. In
addition, there is the issue of how much of this development can proceed without making the new
connection to Rt. 29. We must know if it is possible to build this development as shown on the
approved plan, and if not, it needs to change. In addition, the road past the entrance to the units
does not appear eligible for acceptance into the state system.
7. University Village Circle and University Village Lane will likely have to be private roads due to
VDOT's current road acceptance requirements. The loop road was also called out as private in the
application plan.
Rev. 1: OK
8. The width of University Village Circle is called out as 24ft width in plan view and a 28ft width in
the section. Please correct. Either section is permissible. Please also provide the standard 6ft
Current Development
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 3
planting strip and 5ft sidewalk section for University Village Circle.
Rev. 1: Boulders Circle needs to accommodate parking on at least one side. The minimum width
must be 28' fc -fc.
9. Please provide centerline radii for all roads on sheets R -1, R -2, and R -3.
Rev. 1: not found.
10. Please show easements on all pipes and culverts from VDOT ROW. Easement widths must meet
the standard described in the latest edition of the design manual. [32.5.12]
Rev. 1: OK. This will be correlated with final plats.
11. Please do not show in this plan set the possible future ROW for Boulders Road Extension or the
possible realignment of University Village Drive.
Rev. 1: OK
Pilc: Ll_Isp_rp_PBC_sdp200900033 Univcrsity Villagc.doc