HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201500015 Action Letter 2015-05-22A I-' 1 +lllf Ijj� ,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
May 22, 2015
Bill Ledbetter
Chris Mulligan
914 Monticello Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP201500015 Old Trail Village, Block 27 — Initial Site Plan
Dear Mr. Ledbetter and Mr. Mulligan:
The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative approval to the above
referenced site plan.
This approval shall be valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of this letter, provided
that the developer submits a final site plan for all or a portion of the site within one (1) year after
the date of this letter as provided in section 32.4.3.1 of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of
Albemarle, and thereafter diligently pursues approval of the final site plan.
An Erosion and Sediment Control Permit may be issued after the following approvals are
received:
1. Approval an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17
of the Code of the County of Albemarle.
2. Approval of a Stormwater Management Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of
the Code.
3. Approval of all easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control.
4. Submittal of a tree conservation checklist, if applicable.
The final site plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the following
items are received:
1. A final site plan that satisfies all of the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the
Code.
2. A fee of $1,500.
Please submit 8 copies of the final site plan to the Community Development Department. The
assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies. Once you
receive the first set of comments on the final site plan, please work with each reviewer
individually to satisfy their requirements. Provide proof to the Lead Reviewer of each reviewer's
tentative approval once received. The Lead Review will then notify you when it is time to submit
copies for signature.
The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for
signature until tentative approval has been given by each reviewer for the conditions shown
below. If you have any questions about these conditions or the submittal requirements, please
feel free to contact me at 434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3270 or jnewberry(ii,)albemarle.or .
Sincerely,
J.T. Newberry
Planner
CC: Dave Brockman, March Mountain Properties
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
s:
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Memorandum
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
To: Bill Ledbetter, Chris Mulligan
From: J.T. Newberry, Planner
Division: Planning
Date: May 22, 2015 (revised and updated from SRC meeting on May 21)
Subject: SDP201500015 Old Trail Village, Block 27 — Initial Site Plan
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.)
Planning Division
1. [Comment] Please note how the attached units qualify as "mixed -use" instead of single- family
attached units. The list of permitted uses is found on page 25 of the Code of Development.
[2nd Comment] If the attached units are no longer proposed to be located in a mixed -use area,
then a variation will be needed at least for following four requirements:
1. Lot coverage
2. Setbacks
3. Minimum lot size
4. Height
2. [Comment] Please include a "cumulative development table" that shows this block's impact on the
existing affordable housing, open space, gross density, etc. throughout Old Trail. For an example,
please see the table provided on Sheet 21 of the approved final site plan for Blocks 28 and 29B.
3. [Comment] Table 6 on page 30 of the Code of Development shows the maximum lot coverage
permitted for all types of units in Block 27 is 60 %. Please demonstrate the maximum lot coverage
is not being exceeded for each lot.
[211 Comment] See 2nd comment under #1 above.
4. [Comment] In order to provide street frontage for Lots 6 -9 and 10 -17, please either request Alley
`A' and `B' to be deemed as private streets or request a variation for these lots to get their frontage
through the open space. If a variation is requested, please confirm the open space can meet the
spatial enclosure ratios found on page 36 of the Code of Development.
[2 11 Comment] At the SRC meeting, you stated that either process would be acceptable. Please
submit a private street authorization request with waivers of the sidewalk, planting strip and
street tree requirements. This would be an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance that can be
processed prior to submittal of the plat, if desired. Please note that it would need to be approved
prior to the approval of the final site plan so that Lots 6 -9 and 10 -17 have street frontage.
5. [Comment] On Sheet 7, please update the planting schedule to show the same number of trees that
are shown on the site. There appear to be at least 19 "FP" trees, 14 "PA" trees and 16 "AR" trees.
Please show proposed trees in bold and show existing trees with a lighter gray line.
6. [Comment] Page 21 of the Code of Development notes that at least one pocket park requirement in
Blocks 22, 23, 26 — 29.
Please contact J.T. Newberry in the Planning Division at jnewberry@albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832
ext. 3270 for further information.
Engineering Division
Please see attached comments.
E911
The applicant should contact this office with three (3) proposed road names for 'Alley A' and 'Alley B'
shown on the plan before final approval is given.
Please contact Andy Slack in Information Services at 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3384 for further information.
Inspections Division
No objection.
Fi re/R egcu e
Based on plans dated 3/25/15
1. Relocate hydrant at lot 17 to the intersection of Ashlar Ave. and Alpha Street. Northwest
corner of the intersection is the preferred location.
2. Fire Flow test required before approval. 1,000 gpm @ 20 psi.
Please contact Robbie Gilmer at 434 - 296 -5833 or rgilmer(,albemarle.org for further information.
ACSA
1. Final Water and Sewer plans are required for review and approval by the ACSA. Please
submit 3 copies of the plan, a water data sheet and a sewer data sheet to the attention of
Jeremy Lynn, PE.
2. RWSA Capacity Certification will be required.
Please contact Alex Morrison at 434 - 977 -4511 Ext. 116 or amorrison(cserviceauthority.org for further
information.
Based on the anticipated limited visibility from the EC, the architectural design of the buildings
proposed in Block 27 do not require a Certificate of Appropriateness. The plan is approved as
proposed.
Please contact Brent Nelson at 434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3438 or bnelson(aalbemarle.org for further
information.
Police
Please see attached comments.
VDOT
Please see attached comments.
Project:
Plan preparer
Owner or rep.:
Plan received date:
Date of comments:
Reviewer:
Project Coordinator:
SDP2015 -00015
YlAGIl`11A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Old Trail Village Block 27 — Initial
Chris Mulligan, Bill Ledbetter, Raleigh Davis — Roudabush, Gale & Assoc, Inc
914 Monticello Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902, cmulligan(a),roudabush.com,
bledbetter(c)roudabush.com, rdavis(a)roudabush.com
March Mountain Properties LLC [1005 Heathercroft Circle, Suite 100]
Dave Brockman, dave(&oldtrailvilla eg coin
21 Apr 2015
20 May 2015
John Anderson
J. T. Newberry
1. Increase proposed RW, Golf View Drive, to match existing 61' public RW.
2. Increase proposed RW, Alpha Street. Extend 1 -ft beyond sidewalk (61' public RW).
3. Related to items #1, 2, 16: Revise private drainage easements for inlets in alleys and pipes that would fall
within a 61 -ft public RW (Alpha St. and Golf View Drive). If drainage items lie within a 61' public RW,
eliminate private drainage easements.
4. Related to item #3: Shift inlet structures 207, 205, and 213 so they are located within public RW.
5. 20' Private drainage easement leader line, Alley A, appears to point to FH which would fall within 61'
RW /Alpha Street. Revise. Increase RW. Eliminate easement. Combining private drainage easements
(inlets) with storm lines (between inlets) within public RW lends ambiguous maintenance responsibility.
6. Remove extraneous variable width sight distance easement labels, sheet 4.
7. Str. 226 and 227 labels, sheets 4 and 5, are confusing. There appear to be two pipe sections and a MH
connecting block 27 storm drain system and Upper Ballard Pond (UBP). Provide complete data on this
storm line with block 27 road plans. Note: pipe #157 (226 -1f 36" DIA) is bonded with block 28/29B RP.
8. Label, sheet 4, is confusing: "Outfall & storm pipe 4157 to be removed and relocated" is misleading since it
cannot be installed until all upslope contributing drainage areas are stabilized. It has not been installed, yet
design proposes to remove it. Revise this label for accuracy.
9. Add or transfer Notes to block 27 final site plan similar to Notes displayed in images below, and included
on Approved WP0201400004 plan sheets 5 and 10 — please call if any questions.
10. Submit road plan.
11. Submit revised storm sewer pipe schedules for inlets on Belgrove Street (blocks 26/29B) slated to receive
additional runoff from block 27. Also, calculate runoff from future block 7 (turf/impervious) that may
reach Alpha Street storm inlets. Failure to consider additional future block 7 runoff may compromise
design. Confirm and submit detailed, revised drainage computations for Belgrove Street inlets approved
under road plan, SUB201400092, prior to block 27 final site plan approval. Ensure design of block 28/29B
drainage system is not compromised with addition of block 27 runoff to Belgrove Street.
12. Road plan for block 27 must provide stormwater collection and conveyance to sediment basin approved
under WP0201400004, not Upper Ballard Pond, until all contributing DAs (blocks 28, 29B, 27, 7, future
blocks) are stabilized. Sediment from un- stabilized, upslope areas will reach UBP unless storm system
design routes to existing sediment basin approved under WP0201400004. This may present challenge.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 3
13. Provide design showing and sequence describing storm lines /system needed to convey runoff to sediment
basin adjacent to Old Trail Drive, as long as conveyance is required (until contributing DAs stabilized).
14. Revise block 27 ISP and/or amend SLTB201400092 Str. 148 storm inlet location. Inlet is shown extending
beyond face of curb into Belgrove Street.
15. Revise title sheet/Erosion Control & SWM Note. Phase I & II Erosion control is not provided by the
existing SWM bioretention pond (Upper Ballard Pond). Initial site plan does not include ESC phase sheets.
Block 28/29B (WPO201400004) Phase I, Intermediate Grading, and Phase II ESC is provided by a
sediment basin. Final site plan approval, block 27, requires VESCP Application. Also, since ISP proposes
modification to WPO201400004 (outfall pipe #157 will not be built as shown), WPO201400004 requires
Amendment prior to block 27 site plan approval. Revise ESC /SWM text description/title sheet.
16. Subdivision ordinance (appears to apply) requires that "the principal means of access to a subdivision shall
be either a public street or a private street." (14- 410.F.). Unless ZMA200400024 Code of Development
allows otherwise, revise Alley `A' and `B' to public street/VDOT standards, unless applying for private
street authorization under 14 -233. Design does not provide public (or private) street frontage to many lots.
17. Sheet 2 —Show pipe #156A, temporary stormwater outfall to sediment basin (WPO201400004).
18. Sheet 3 —Label curb type /s.
19. Sheet 6 — Provide 1' contours.
20. On road plan, show CG -6 to roll -top curb transition.
21. Final site plan approvaliblock 27 requires: approved road plan, approved VESCP/block 27, and
Amendment to VSMP/WPO201400004 (blocks 28/29B; Approved 26- Aug -14).
Imazes re. Items #9, 12, above.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 3
157 �
-fi84
1 �
x — Reshape Edge of Existing
z Buffer for Future tots
_Site 5tabili
Install Permanent jU ,11 into
=l
Upper Ballard Pond $ Remove—
sediment ~ f
l Sec}irnent Basing Pipe -Str#1 A j
L �
ti 1
Propose 1 ff
`' y w — — ediment
Contact John Anderson, Engineering Dept, if any questions. janderson2nalbemarle.org / 434 - 296 -5832 -x3069
File: SDP201500015 -Old Trail Village block 27 052015
ACCREDITED LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Initial Site Plan
Lead Reviewer: Johnathan Newberry
Item Number: SDP201500015
Project Name: Old Trail Village Block 27
Due Date: May 18th, 2015
POLICE DEPARTMENT
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
All Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) recommendations are considered to be advisory. The
recommendations are meant to be utilized as a design strategy to create a safer environment for the future residents of
the Old Trail community.
Advisory Landscaping Recommendations
All shrubbery and ornamental grasses used in foundation planting areas should follow the CPTED two foot six
foot rule. Shrubs should be no taller than two feet in front of building windows. Tree crowns in common areas,
near buildings, and along pedestrian walkways should be pruned no less than six feet from ground level to
maximize surveillance opportunities. Shrubbery should always remain below the window line so natural
surveillance is not hindered from the interior of the residence out onto property grounds.
Shrubs, ornamental grasses, and ornamental flowering trees should be planted no less than six feet from
pedestrian walkways to eliminate concealment and ambush opportunities.
Shrubbery and ornamental grasses should be maintained at no more than two feet tall around pedestrian
entranceways to eliminate concealment and ambush opportunities.
Advisory Lighting Recommendations
All lighting should be within the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) guidelines for
minimum security lighting standards.
It is advised that all pedestrian walkways, be illuminated to a minimum 1.0 fc horizontal on pavement and a
minimum of .5 fc to .8 fc vertical 5' above ground.
All lighting on site should be at a 4:1 average to minimum ratio (background to face), and designed to limit
light trespass and glare.
Use pedestrian scale lighting (see below) in high pedestrian traffic areas. All lighting on site should be
sufficient to allow facial recognition at thirty feet. Thirty feet is the minimum for reaction time to determine if a
person is a potential threat.
It is advised that the open space area and all alley ways should be illuminated to a minimum 1.0 fc horizontal on
pavement and a minimum of .5 to .8 fc vertical 5' above ground.
Advisory Territorial Recommendations
Concrete sidewalks leading to the individual buildings from the public sidewalks should be constructed with
pavers or different textures and colors to indicate a transition from public space to private space.
All building entrances should be designed with front porches or stoops to promote ownership of the property
and encourage surveillance.
Pedestrian Scale Lh!hting
Typical pedestrian scale luminaires are mounted at a height of 10 to 20 feet. Typical pedestrian zone lighting is
usually mounted in the 12 to 18 ft. range. All luminaires should be dark sky compliant and designed to
minimize glare and light trespass.
WIMMIMI
MPO Steve Watson, ICPS, CPD
Albemarle County Police Department
Crime prevention Unit
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper. Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
May 13, 2015
Mr. J.T. Newberry
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP - 2015 -00015 Old Trail Village Block 27
Dear Mr. Newberry:
The Old Trail Village Block 27 initial Site Plan, dated March 25, 2015, has been reviewed and
we offer the following comments:
1. The seal, on sheet 1, should be signed or clearly marked "Preliminary".
2. Survey and mapping control information such as benchmarks and connection distances to
the nearest intersection of a state route or commercial entrance should be provided.
3. A plan legend should be included.
4. The design speed for the proposed roadways should be provided on the plan sheets and
profiles.
5. The angle between road centerlines at each skew intersection should be clearly labeled.
6. It would be helpful if the size of the station tick marks, at 50' intervals, was increased and
if the road centerline stationing was added to sheet 4.
7. The sight lines restrict parking on the streets. On- street parking should be clearly
identified.
8. The following should be provided at the intersection sight line triangles: "Intersection
Sight Distance ", offset from the edge of travel way and centerline offset. The sight
distance lengths do not appear to meet the lengths defined in appendix F of the Road
Design Manual. What does HSD stand for?
9. Sight Line Profiles should be provided.
10. There appears to be landscaping in conflict with the line of sight. Le.: Alpha Street sta.
10 +55
11. Standard details from current versions of the Road Design Manual, Road and Bridge
Standards, VDOT Drainage Manual, etc. as appropriate should be provided.
12. The ADT of each roadway should be labeled.
13. The sidewalk and planting cross -slope should be provided on the road typical section, on
Sheet 1.
14. The street trees should be graphically shown, on the road typical section, with a
dimension to the back of curb as applicable or clearly noted in the plans.
15. Diagonal curb ramps are not recommended for new construction they should be located
at the tangents, see appendix A of the Road Design Manual. I.e.: Intersection of Golf
View and AIpha Street.
16. Storm sewer /inlet computations, storm profiles, road profiles, waterline profiles and
sanitary profiles should be provided.
17. Why is the waterline shifting across Golf View Drive? We prefer for it to continue in the
west bound lane, approximate station 21 +85. If leak occurs it is more likely to happen
at the fittings.
18. The waterline connections should be in accordance with the "Asphalt Pavement
Restoration" detail for open cut utility installations (LUP -OC).
19. The erosion and sediment control plan should be submitted for review. This may be
submitted separately.
20. Signage should be shown in accordance with the current version of the MUTCD and -or
the Virginia Supplement to the MUTCD. Individual signs should have the MUTCD sign
label reference included on the plan.
21. The waterline easement on Alpha Street, station 11 +50, appears to be mislabeled.
22. When the roll -top curb transitions into CG -6 and ties into drop -inlet the driveways on lots
25 and 17 may be impacted.
If you need further information concerning this project, or if you wish to schedule a meeting,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 422 -9894.
Sincerely,
�o<-..PZV
Shelly A. Plaster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
701 VDOT Way
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING