HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200900076 Review Comments Preliminary Site Plan 2009-12-01�� pF ALg�
� �'IRGINZP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Yaniglos, Senior Planner
From: Amy Pflaum, Engineering Review
Division: Current Development
Date: October 2, 2009
REV #1: December 1, 2009
Subject: SDP200900076, Old Trail Phase 9, Blocks 4,11,13,14 - Preliminary Site Plan
The revised preliminary site plan for Old Trail Phase 9, submitted on November 13, 2009, has been
reviewed. Current Development Engineering can recommend approval once the following comments have
been addressed:
General Site Plan Comments
1. The boundaries of the Preliminary Plat as shown on Sheet 2 do not match the approved Final Plat
for Old Trail Village Center Blocks 4, 11, 13, 14 (SUB200900103). Please clarify the boundaries
of this project.
REV #1: The revisions to Sheet 2 include changing the title of the sheet to Limits of
Preliminary Site Plan, however, the Table of Contents on Sheet 1 continue to designate
Sheet 2 as Limits of Preliminary Plat. Please clarify the intentions of Sheet 2.
2. On the General Notes on Sheet 1, please specify which roads or road portions will be built with the
different phases of this project.
REV #1: Phasing of the roads is still unclear. The roads are necessary to provide frontage
for the proposed buildings and must be built with the blocks. Please revise the Phasing
portion of the General Notes with the following:
Phase A: Block 4, Golf Drive between Old Trail Drive and Claremont Lane, Claremont
Lane between Golf Drive and Upland Drive, Upland Drive between Old Trail Drive and
Claremont Lane
Phase B: Block 13, Golf Drive between Claremont Lane and Fielding Run, Upland Drive
between Claremont Lane and Fielding Run Drive, Fielding Run Drive between Golf Drive
and Upland Drive
Phase C: Block 11, Claremont Lane between Upland Drive and Glen Valley Drive, Glen
Valley Drive between Old Trail Drive and Claremont Lane
Phase D: Block 14, Glen Valley Drive between Claremont Lane and Fielding Run Drive,
Fielding Run Drive between Upland Drive and Glen Valley Drive
Please revise the note on Sheet 1 to state that this property is in the Lickinghole Creek Watershed
[18- 32.5.6.f].
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
4. Street cross sections show a width of 7 -feet provided for on- street parking. The Street
Specifications table provided on the same sheet shows that the Code of Development requires 8-
foot parking lanes.
REV #1: Comment has been addressed. Parking lanes on Glen Valley have been increased
to 8 -feet, right -of -way has increased to 61 -feet.
Right -of -way widths shown for streets on the plans and in the cross sections do not meet the
requirements of the Street Specifications table from the Code of Development.
REV #1: Variations to the right -of -way widths approved in the ZMA must be approved by
the Chief of Planning.
6. The Code of Development requires an 8 -foot sidewalk along Glen Valley Drive between Old Trail
Drive and Claremont Lane.
REV #1: Comment is in error and is withdrawn.
Road plans for Claremont Lane between Golf Drive and Upland Drive and Upland Drive between
Old Trail Drive and Claremont Lane were approved on April 17, 2009 (Phase 2 -Block 4 Road
Plans WP0200800106). Several discrepancies exist between the approved plans and the Phase 9
Site Plan including right -of -way widths, cross - sections, entrance locations, and stormsewer layout.
These approved plans will need to be amended.
REV #1: Amendments to the previously approved road plans must be approved prior to
Final Site Plan approval for this project if discrepancies continue to exist.
Road plans for portions of Glen Valley Drive and Claremont Lane were previously submitted with
the Final Site Plan for Old Trail Village Blocks 15 & 31 (SDP200800072). Street cross sections
and layouts do not correspond between the plans. Previously submitted road plans should be
revised or withdrawn.
REV #1: Amendments to the previously approved road plans must be approved prior to
Final Site Plan approval for this project if discrepancies continue to exist.
9. The alley intersection of Block 13 to Golf Drive should align with the travelway exiting Block 2.
REV #1: Entrance from Golf Drive to Block 13 has been eliminated. Comment no longer
applies.
10. The Block 4 and Block 13 entrances onto Claremont Lane should align for a proper intersection.
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
11. Please show sight distance triangles at the intersections of Upland Drive and Glenn Valley Drive
with Old Trail Drive. [18- 4.12.17.b]
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
12. Please show sight distance triangles at the intersection of Golf Drive with Old Trail Drive to
ensure that the building proposed in Lot 30, Block 4 is not encroaching. [18- 4.12.17.b]
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
13. Please show the sight distance triangles at the intersection of the two private roads within Block
14. [18- 4.12.17.b]
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
14. A portion of the buildings in Lot 14 -Block 4, Lot 6 -Block 13, Lot 6 -Block 14, and Lot 13 -Block
14 appear to be within the sight distance triangles. [18- 4.12.17.b]
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
15. Vehicles exiting the garages on Lots 14 -19 of Block 4 pose a circulation hazard. Sight lines for a
reversing vehicle will be limited until the vehicle is sufficiently clear of the garage, causing the
vehicle to be well within the travelway prior to a clear line of sight being established. All traffic
entering and exiting Block 4 will pass by Lots 14 -16, this is an unsafe situation. The same
problem with inadequate driveway lengths appears throughout Blocks 13 and 14. [18- 32.7.2]
REV #1: On page 19, the Code of Development states, "Detached garages for single family
residences and townhouses shall be located at the rear of their lots. Garages shall be
accessed via alleys wherever possible." Alleys, as proposed on the Code of Development
Transportation Plan, have a 24' ROW and 16' pavement, allowing a 4' grass strip between
the travelway and the property line. If the garages were fronting on alleys, the 5 feet is
potentially approvable (because it would actually be 9 feet), but throughout Phase 9, the
garages are fronting onto private roads and parking lot travelways which are paved to
within V of the ROW line. This was discussed at a meeting with the applicant's consultants
on 11113. The applicant will be submitting a variation requesting an appropriate garage
setback.
16. The proposed building in Lot 29, Block 4 is within the proposed sidewalk and landscape easement
to be dedicated to VDOT.
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
17. Bumper blocks are required in parking spaces that abut sidewalk, unless the sidewalk has a
minimum width of 6 -feet. [18- 4.12.16.e]
REV #1: Comment has been addressed.
18. Bumper blocks are required within the tandem parking spaces proposed in 14. [18- 4.12.16.e]
REV #1: Tandem parking has been removed.
19. The proposed contour labels are illegible, slopes of parking lots and streets can not be reviewed.
[18- 32.5.6.d]
REV #1: Comment has been addressed. Parking lot and travelway slopes appear to be
within Ordinance limits.
20. The proposed development within the blocks is different than what was shown in the Pos-
Development Drainage Analysis provided with Old Trail Village Blocks 15 & 31
(WP0200800046). Is the proposed bio- filter taking into account the higher density development?
REV #1: Adequate bio- filter sizing will be verified with the Final Site Plan and the Water
Protection Ordinance application.
21. Are the impervious area calculations on Sheet 4 accounting for all the impervious area shown on
this sheet, or just the impervious areas from Blocks 4, 11, 13, and 14?
REV #1: The impervious area calculation differentiates between the area to be captured in
the Ballard Field Pond and that to be captured in a proposed bio- filter. However, the plan
shows two proposed bio- filters that will capture stormwater from this project, one behind
Block 2 and one behind Block 16. Please further differentiate the flow pattern of
stormwater from this project so that it can be demonstrated that the conceptual size shown
for the bio- filter behind Block 16 is adequate and that the previously designed bio - filter
behind Block 2 is properly sized. Please add the floor area, as designed, of the Block 2 bio -
filter to this plan. The WPO application for this project will require that the floor area of
the Block 2 bio- filter be verified (if already constructed) and a calculation of all impervious
area captured by it, including areas from Blocks 2 and 3.
22. Without the completion of Blocks 2, 15, 16, 17, and 18, this proposed development lacks the
infrastructure necessary for storm sewer outfall. Adequate channels would need to be designed
from the points of release to the appropriate stormwater facilities.
REV #1: Adequate channel will be addressed with the Final Site Plan and the Water
Protection Ordinance application.
Final Site Plan comments (for information purposes only)
23. Final Site Plan can not be approved until the stormsewer outfall for Block 4 shown through
Claremont Lane to the Ballard Field Pond or an alternative adequate outfall has been constructed.
24. Final Site Plan can not be approved until the stormsewer outfall for Blocks 11 and 14 shown
through future Blocks 15, 17, and 18 or an alternative adequate outfall has been constructed.
25. Final Site Plan can not be approved until the stormsewer outfall for Block 13 through future Block
16 or an alternative adequate outfall has been constructed.
26. Final Site Plan can not be approved until the Bio- Filter proposed to the west of future Block 16, or
an alternative stormwater facility have been designed and approved.
27. Final Site Plan can not be approved until all roads depicted on this site plan have been designed
and approved. Road plans should be submitted with an accompanying plat of the required public
right -of -way.
New Comments on 2nd submittal
28. Please add a note to the Utility Plan explaining what will happen to the existing 12" waterline that
runs through the site. It must be abandoned and relocated with this project if the Block 2 and
Blocks 15 & 31 Plans are not constructed first.
29. Buildings in Block 13 are shown within a proposed 20 -foot utility easement. This can be resolved
with the Final Site Plan.
30. Without the construction of Blocks 15 & 31, Blocks 11 & 14 have no sanitary sewer outfall. The
timing of the construction of the outfall can be resolved with the Final Site Plan.
\\ Cob- dts01 \cityviewlnk\Docs \2009 \SDP \SDP200900076 Old Trail Village- Blocks 4,11,13,14- Prelim \CDE2_psp_ADP_09 -00076 Old Trail BLKs
4,11,13,14 Prelim.doc