HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201500004 Review Comments Initial Site Plan 2015-03-03County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
Memorandum
To: Scott Collins (scott @collins - engineering.com)
From: Rachel Falkenstein, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: March 3, 2015
Subject: SDP 201500004 Foothill Crossing II — Initial Site Development Plan
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments 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.): [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision /Zoning
Ordinances unless otherwise specified.]
[Comment] This application was reviewed against Site Development Plan requirements only. It
appears that lot lines, easements, road standards, etc are shown on the plan, which do not match
previously submitted road plans (SUB201400187) and preliminary subdivision plat (SUB201400094).
Any subdivision related comments are provided for reference only (unless necessary for site plan
approval), and to convey the issues that will arise when /if a new subdivision plat and road plans are
submitted.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Amend title to state that this is an initial site plan, not preliminary site plan.
3. [32.5.2(a)] Include Entrance Corridor (EC) in zoning designation.
4. [32.5.2(a) & 4.11.3(a)] Approval from Fire and Rescue is required for reduction of minimum side yards
to 10 feet.
5. [32.5.2(a)] In table showing information about abutting parcels provide a column showing parcel
numbers (corresponding to numbers shown on the plan) and provide zoning district.
6. [32.5.2(a)] Show boundary dimensions of lots within R -2 zoning to show that frontage requirements
are met. Since lot 30 has its frontage in the R -2 zoning district, the requirements of an R -2 lot will need
to be met (70' of frontage for cluster development.) Either pull this lot out of R -2 or increase the
frontage to 70 feet.
7. [32.5.2(b)] Provide acreages of all proposed lots.
8. [32.5.2(b)] Amend density note to accurately reflect the number of lots within each zoning
designation. Math does not appear to be accurate for R -6 proposed lots.
9. [32.5.2(b)] The acreage of the project area should contain all proposed improvements and open space.
Include the area for roads and alleys that extend beyond the property lines and the current project
boundary line if you haven't already. Amend density and open space calculations accordingly.
10. [32.5.2(b)] Include guest parking numbers within parking schedule. One guest parking space is
required for every four multi - family units. Show number of required spaces and number that will be
provided with street parking.
11. [32.5.2(f)] Show locations of all WPO stream buffers on the site. Consult County GIS for locations of
WPO stream buffers. Stream buffer is labeled on northeastern portion of site but is not shown. If
stream buffer has been adjusted in adjacent Parkside Village, please provide exhibit showing location
of adjusted stream buffer and previous County approval.
12. [32.5.2(f) & 17 -600] Grading is proposed for lots 8 -10 within the stream buffer. Amend design to
remove stream buffer disturbance.
13. [32.5.2(f) & 17- 602(b)(1)] To the extent practical, as determined by the Albemarle County Service
Authority or the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, the location of the water or sewer lines shall be
outside of all stream buffer areas. Attempt to remove sanitary sewer connections to areas outside of
the stream buffer.
14. [32.5.2(1)] Show the connection with Hill Top Street on the site plan.
15. [32.5.2(k)] Verify that all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage facilities have
been shown on the plan.
16. [32.5.2(p)] Provide a landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
17. [32.7.9.8] If the site is to be developed for residential uses at a gross density of ten (10) dwelling units
per acre or less, the minimum tree canopy is twenty (20) percent. Provide calculations to show tree
canopy requirement will be met.
18. [Comment] The Crozet Master Plan shows a greenway through the southwest portion of the property,
adjacent to the stream. Please consider dedicating the northern portion of the stream buffer (outside
of the proposed lots) to the County for greenway dedication.
19. [Comment] The previously submitted road plans (SUB201400187) show a proposed public road
through the eastern portion of the development (Maryland Street). Is this street no longer proposed?
The Crozet Master Plan shows two north -south connections through this site. The second connection
would improve connectivity throughout the area and also improve connectivity on the site. This road
would also eliminate the need for turnarounds at the eastern ends of Alley D and Alley F.
20. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to final
site plan approval. It appears access easements will be required for Alley D and Binion Street, grading
easements on the southeast portion of the development, a drainage easement on the southwest
portion of the development and utility easements for connections to existing water and sewer lines in
Parkside Village and south of the property.
Please contact Rachel Falkenstein in the Planning Division by using rfalkenstein @albemarle.org or 434 -296-
5832 ext. 3272 for further information.
NJ �=
�y R
i`
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
February 23, 2015
Ms. Rachel Falkenstein
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP - 2015 -00004 Villas at Foothill Crossing Preliminary Site Plan
Dear Ms. Falkenstein:
We have reviewed the Villas at Foothill Crossing Preliminary Site PIan, dated January 1, 2015,
as submitted by Coll ins,Engineering, and offer the following comments:
1. The proposed layout does not match the Road Plans that was previously submitted
and commented on December 23, 2014. Storm sewer computations, road profiles, line
of sight profiles etc. will need to be updated accordingly. When the Road Plans are
resubmitted, to reflect the layout change proposed in the Villas at Foothill Crossing,
additional comments may be generated.
2. The 40' strip reserved for the future extension of Hill Top Street should be dedicated
for public use.
3. Park Ridge Drive should make the connection into Hill Top Street. Hill Top Street's
pavement width is 26' (with roll top curb) and Park Ridge Drive's pavement width is
32' (with CG -6). The west side of the Fremont Street and Park Ridge intersection
should match Hill Top Street's typical section (with CG -6 rather than roll top curb)
and the east side of the intersection should match the proposed Park Ridge Drive
typical section. Currently there are DI's on each side of Hill Top Street. The DI's
could be used to transition from the existing roll top curb into CG -6.
4. Any alley that will tie into a publicly maintained street, that will generate 50 or less
trips per day and has less than 5 single family residences will be classified as a "Low
Volume Commercial Entrance ". Therefore, the alley must meet the minimum
standards found in Appendix F of the Road and Bridge Design Manual, see figure 4-
The minimum curb radii are 20'
5. What is the anticipated ADT for the Park Ridge Drive Connector Road?
6. Any alley that will tie into a publicly maintained street, which will generate between
50 -200 trips per day and a maximum of 5,000 vehicular trips per day on the adjacent
highway and a maximum of 10% truck traffic, will be classified as a Moderate
Volume Commercial Entrance. Therefore, the alley must meet the minimum
standards found in Appendix F of the Road and Bridge Design Manual, see figure 4-
15. The minimum curb radii are 25'.
7. To maintain sight lines, trees, vegetation and other objects shall be restricted from the
field of vision. There are numerous trees that may restrict sight distance.
8. What is proposed on lots 69 and 70? Have the trips been incorporated in the ADT's
provided on sheet 5?
If you need further information concerning this project, or wish to schedule a meeting, please do
not hesitate to contact me at (434) 422 -9894.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. Plaster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
YlAGIl`11A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Rachel Falkenstein, Planning
From: Justin Deel, Engineering
Date: 17 February 2015
Subject: Foothill Crossing II (SDP201500004)
The initial site plan for Foothill Crossing II has been reviewed. The following concerns should be
addressed;
1. The site plan must reflect changes required on previous reviews of VSMP and Road Plans for
Foothill Crossing II, specifically the request to revise your design to follow the natural drainage of
the site topography. (This may have a significant effect on the site layout, and preliminary /initial
plans should not be approved without this comment being adequately addressed.)
2. County approved turnarounds must be provided where streets and alleys end (AC Design
Standards Manual).
3. All WPO stream buffers should be shown matching the County GIS.
4. VSMP application items should be removed from site plans.
5. There should be no structures within drainage easements.
file: EI_isp_JD_Foothill Crossing II.doc