HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400040 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2014-09-17YlAGIl`11A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Project:
Old Trail Village - blocks 12 and 15
Plan preparer:
Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc.
Engineer:
Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc.
Owner or rep.:
March Mountain Properties LLC
[dave @oldtrailvillage. com]
Plan received date:
22 May 2014
(Rev. 1, block 15)
30 Jul Aug 2014
(1St submittal, block 12)
22 Aug 2014
Date of comments:
21 July 2014 (block 15)
(Rev. 1, block 15)
17 Sep 2014 (block 15, 12)
Reviewer:
John Anderson
Project Coordinator:
J. T. Newberry
Note: Initial site plan included blocks 12 & 15. This is a first final site plan review for block 12, second final site
plan review for block 15. Comments for each block follow under separate headings. These blocks are adjacent.
Comments to address, OTV Block 15 Final Site Plan — (SDP - 201400040)
(Ref also 22 Jan 2014 comments, Initial Site Plan (SDP201400001, Michelle Roberge)
There are proffers on driveway standards and entrances to dwellings. It will be helpful if the proposed
layout of all townhomes and driveways can be shown on this plan to see if driveway standards, sight
distances from garages, and overlot grading works with the site. Mass grading does not appear to exceed
5 %, but include construction note for proffer statement: driveways not steeper than 20 %; grades no steeper
than 10% adjacent to possible entrances to dwellings not served by a stairway. [Ref. 9 Jan 2014 initial site
plan, sheet 6, PROFFER STATEMENT, OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, 7. Overlot Grading Plan, H.A.; Also, initial site
plan comments, 22 Jan 2014, Item #3] (Rev. 1) Comment not addressed — Options: i) include preliminary
site plan sheet 6 in its entirety (SDP201400001; PROFFER STATEMENT, OLD TRAIL VILLAGE, 14 -Sep 2005,
ZMA2004- 00024); ii) include proffer statement, condition 7.H. /I.; or, iii) add brief notes to plan sheets as
requested: driveways not steeper than 20 %; grades no steeper than 10% adjacent to possible entrances to
dwellings not served by a stairway. Proposed grading is a condition of initial and final site plans. Proffer
conditions relating to grading have direct bearing on project design and construction. Select option, include
information. Notes can be added to sheet 8 grading notes. Applies to blocks 15 and 12. [§ 18- 32.5.2.d.]
2. [Applies to block 12; see below]
3. [Applies to block 12; see below]
4. [Applies to block 12; see below]
5. [Applies to block 12; see below]
6. Show location of transition from roll top to full CG -6 near DI's on Court Mont Way, consistent with
transition detail, sheet 13. Also, unless connections for street intersections with commercial entrances are
proposed, delete detail and replace with VDOT CG -9 (A, B, or C) special design entrance gutter [VDOT
Road Design Manual, Appendix B -1, Sect. 4, Elements of Typical Section, H., Private Entrances — Figure 7,
Roll Top Curb Entrance Detail. Also: General Construction Notes for Streets, Title p., Note #5. Link:
http: / /www.extranet.vdot .state.va.us /locdes/Electronic Pubs /2005 %20RDM /AppendB(1).pd ]. (Rev. 1)
Comment addressed.
New
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 5
7. [Applies to block 12; see below]
8. [Applies to block 12; see below]
9. VDOT Road & Bridge Standards, 2008 Edit, SMH -1 specifies construction details for utility manholes over
12' in height. Please add a note to the profile (sheet 11) that all manhole structures with a depth of 12' or
greater shall have safety slabs in accordance with VDOT standards. [Link:
http: / /www.extranet.vdot. state. va. us /LocDes/ Electronic _Pubs /2008Standards /Sectionl400 /1411 01.pdf ]
(Rev. 1) Comment not addressed; request restated —sheet #s changed; please add note to sheet 12.
10. Please add note to the profiles that all structures with a depth of 4' or greater shall have steps in accordance
with standard ST -1 as found in the 2008 Road and Bridge Standards [Link:
http: / /www.extranet.vdot. state. va. us /LocDes/ Electronic _Pubs /2008Standards /Section100 /106 09.pdf ].
(Rev. 1) Comment not addressed; request restated —sheet #s changed; please add note to sheets 11, 12.
11. Provide permanent public drainage easement for pipe 58 beyond VDOT R.W. (Rowcross St. /Fielding Run
Drive) (Rev. 1) Comment addressed; pipe 58 between inlets 57 and 59 has been eliminated.
12. Furnish `No Parking' signs along N side of Rowcross Street to prevent 2 -way parking. (Rev. 1) Comment
addressed; `No Parking' signs provided on south side of Rowcross Street.
13. Provide the sidewalk detail. (Rev. 1) Comment not addressed. Provide detail as requested.
14. CG -12 should be added at NE corner of Fielding Run and Rowcross Street. (VDOT road plan comments,
12 -June 2014, Item #4) (Rev. 1) Comment addressed.
15. Show and shade stream buffer impacts associated with sanitary utility line installation, sheets 5 and 8
(impacts to be mitigated under WPO/VSMP application). (Rev. 1) Comment not addressed. Ref. sheets
2, 3 of WPO201400047 which show buffer impact area hatched. RGA comment response letter, 29 -Jul
2014, estimates impact = 850sf. Show (shade) and label impact area on final site plan, as initially requested.
An estimate of 840sf (24' X 35') appears reasonable. A lesser figure is likely unreasonable. [§ 18-
32.7.4. l .a -§17-406.A.1.]
16. Provide public drainage easements for pipes 62 and unnumbered pipe leaving structure 27 (Rowcross St.—
Ref sheet 2, 9 Jan 2014 initial site plan for example of recorded drainage easement, this block). (Rev. 1)
Comment addressed, but review error. ACCD Asst. County Attorney -led training on easements,
dedications, etc, on 22 -Aug 2014, requires reversal of comment, and revision. Drainage easements beyond
public RW are private, and will not be maintained by Albemarle County or State (VDOT). Please label or
re -label all drainage easements beyond public RW PRIVATE. Comment applies to blocks 12 and 15 — please
check labels carefully (existing /modified sediment basin, Rowcross St, Court Mont Way, Private alley `A'),
and please accept apology for error. This will be a standard item of review with future site and road plans,
and with plats. Easements beyond public RW are Private. (§ 18- 32.7.4.2.a.1.)
17. VDOT must approve plans for public roadways (Claremont Lane, Fielding Run Drive, Rowcross Street).
18. Final site plan approval requires an approved road plan, and approved VSMP permit.
19. Include VDOT IS -1 inlet shaping detail.
20. Reference road plan comments, sent /dated 15 -Sep 2014. Incorporate revisions per road plan comments.
21. Revise sheet 9: Plans reference a bioretention basin approved under WPO2012 -00013 and reference "block
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 5
14 SWM Plan submitted under separate cover." That plan is WP02013- 00021. Revise bioretention basin
label to reference WP02013- 00021, and to read MODIFIED BIORETENTION BASIN.
22. Sheet 9 — Confirm that Ex. 12" D.I. W/L shown on Claremont Lane is to be abandoned.
23. Compare sheet 11 Rowcross St. profile with sheet 13 storm sewer profile Ex. #32 - #27A, especially sta.
12 +50 -17 +70 ( Rowcross St) with storm sewer section between inlet 47 (Fielding Run Drive/Rowcross St)
and inlet 27 (sta. 12 +50). Note difference in existing contours. Revise to show accurate existing elevations
in each profile (required for review, construction, and accurate earthwork estimate /road - drainage bond).
Comments to address, OTV Block 12 Final Site Plan — (SDP- 201400061)
(Also, see 22 -Jan 2014 comments, Initial Site Plan (SDP201400001, Michelle Roberge)
1. Include grading note, condition, or initial site plan sheet #6 in its entirety. Select option, include
information. [Applies to block 12 and 15 -see item #1, p. 1, above]
2. The steep grading on Private Road "A" near lot 1 should be revised. [Initial site plan comment; with
current design: NA]
3. The zoning approval allowed for the use of alleys when lots front along a green space or common amenity.
According to the proposed plan, lot 14 does not front green space. Please address. [Initial site plan
comment; with current design: NA].
4. The type of temporary turnaround near lots 12, 13, and 14 has been problematic with other approved plans.
It has been used for parking spaces. Please connect road "A" to Glenn Valley Drive to avoid the turnaround.
This will also resolve comment 5 since green space can be provided for lot 14. [Initial site plan comment;
with current design: NA].
5. Remove the temporary turnaround near lot 1. [Initial site plan comment.] Furnish pavement geometry at
north end of Private Alley `A' sufficient for a car /non - commercial truck to enter /exit garage, Lot 12. Revise
north end Alley `A' —see design, Private Road `A', initial site plan.
6. Show location of transition from roll top to full CG -6 near DI's on Court Mont Way and Private Alley `A'
consistent with transition detail, sheet 12 (§ 18- 32.6.2.e.3.)
7. Lots 13 -18 do not meet the access requirements for fire rescue access if road "A" will serve as primary
access to lots. E/P to E/P should be 20' wide at a minimum. Initial site plan comment restated: Lots 1 -12
do not meet access requirements for fire rescue access. Private Alley "A" will serve as primary access to
these lots. (§ 18- 32.7.2.1.a.) E/P to E/P should be 20' wide, minimum. Ref. -§ 14- 410.D. — "The design
specifications shall be determined by the county engineer."
8. It appears a waiver for the frontage road, private alley "A ", is necessary for planting strips and sidewalks.
Please discuss with planning. [Initial site plan comment; with current design: defer to Planning]
9. Furnish specific project phasing information. If all roads and utilities within the entire site are included in
phase 1, it is unclear what "Phase 2 will solely consist of the construction of infrastructure for Lots 1 -12"
means. Clarify if this includes everything except dwelling units. Please provide timing of phase 2 and
which approvals —from Applicant's point of view —will remain outstanding, and be required prior to
commencing phase 2 of project. [§18-32.5.2.c.]
10. Sheet 2, phasing plan: Identify (number) each lot.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4of5
11. Sheet 3 — Remove reference to public drainage easement for any drainage casement beyond VDOT R/W
(see #16, above/block 15, #24, below).
12. Indicate via note or label that block 15 development features are proposed, not existing. Delete labels and
reference to existing block 15 curb, signs, pavement, inlets, etc, unless constructed or approved to be built
(sheet 3 / other sheets, as necessary).
13. Sheet 3 —Do not show sidewalk, south side Glen Valley Drive, unless it exists or is approved to be built.
14. Sheet 4 — Furnish radius of Private Alley `A' (§ 18- 32.5.2.1.).
15. Sheet 4 —Show paved width, Court Mont Way.
16. Sheet 4 —Show sidewalk width north of lots 12 -19
17. Provide sidewalk detail.
18. Sheet 4 — revise location of street sign, west end Court Mont Way, to avoid pipe conflict.
19. Sheet 4 — Provide typical section for proposed 8' wide sidewalk west of Lots 1 -12 (Phase 2 development).
20. Sheet 4 —Add note to indicate private alley `A' driveway entrances will not be VDOT CG -9 or Std PE -1.
Furnish typical for private alley `A' driveway entrances.
21. Shift private - public ROW line on Rowcross St. east to radius return at Int. Rowcross St.- Claremont Lane.
22. Defer to Planning on Alley /Pvt. Access Easement concept for Lots 1 -12, but this concept discards a more
favorable initial site plan design. Initially, six lots were proposed to front a private alley. Current proposal
has 12 lots fronting a private alley. Further, with this design, future development lots to the south are tied to
access via Alley/Pvt. Easement. This does not meet § 14 -403: "Each lot within a subdivision shall have
frontage on an existing or proposed street." Alley `A' paved width, excluding roll -top gutter width, should
be 20' minimum —#7, above. Proposed 16' EP -EP is insufficient width; design proposes primary access via
alley, without private or VDOT street standards. Engineering recommends connecting Alley `A' through to
Glen Valley Drive, barring VDOT objection. (§14-410.D)
23. Revise sheet 8: Plans reference a bioretention basin approved under WP02012 -00013 and reference "block
14 SWM Plan submitted under separate cover." That plan is WP02013- 00021. Revise bioretention basin
label to reference WP02013- 00021, and to read MODIFIED BIORETENTION BASIN.
24. Please label (or re- label) all drainage easements beyond public R/W PRIVATE. Comment applies to blocks
12 and 15 — please check labels carefully (existing/modified sediment basin, Rowcross St, Court Mont Way,
Private alley `A'). This will be a standard item with future site /road plans, and plats. Easements beyond
public RW are Private. (§ 18- 32.7.4.2.a.1.)
25. Sheet 8 —Add grading notes, per Proffer Statement —see item #1, p. -1 (block 15)
26. Reference road plan comments, sent /dated 15 -Sep 2014. Incorporate revisions per road plan comments.
27. Sheet 11- Revise detail, Typical Section Rowcross Street, to reference private R/W, public R/W stations.
28. VDOT must approve plans for public roadways (Claremont Lane, Fielding Run Drive, Rowcross Street).
29. Final site plan approval requires an approved road plan, and approved VSMP permit.
Note: Final site plan approval requires VSMP approval. Please consider VSMP plan review comments to
Engineering Review Comments
Page 5 of 5
extent they reference final site plan elements. Anticipate VSMP comments 17/18 -Sep 2014.
Please contact John Anderson in the Engineering Dept at janderson2galbemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3069 if
any questions.
File: SDP201400061- SDP201400040 -Old Trail Village blocks 12- 15 -FSP- 091714