Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201500102 Correspondence 2015-09-08 (6)see& TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. September 4, 2015 Mr. Troy Austin, P. E. Area Land Use Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Land Development — South Culpeper District P.O Box 1017 Troy, Virginia 22974 RE: SUB20 1 500 1 02 Dunlora V — Preliminary Plat Dear Troy: Please see the electronically submitted Preliminary Plat for Dunlora V. We have revised the Preliminary Plat to address your comments dated July 20, 2015 in accordance with the following. I : 1TE Code 230 is for Condominium/Townhouse.. Based on the lot layout, it appears that 214 Single - family Detached would be more appropriate. 2. The Traffic Generation table should include a total ADT for each street as this is used for minimum street section requirements as defined in Appendix B(1) of the Road Design Manual. Response: The ITE designation has been changed to 210 Single Family Detached. The total ADT for each street has been added to sheet C 1.0. 3. Per Table 1 in Appendix $(1) of the Road Design Manual, the minimum width of the proposed streets is 24' face to face. 4. The Road Cross Section detail should clearly indicate that the street trees will be located a minimum of 3' behind the back of curb. 5. The Road Cross Section should clearly indicate that the right-of-way is to be a minimum of V beyond the edge of the sidewalks. 6. The Road Cross Section should clearly indicate whether on- street parking is proposed or not. Response: The widths for roads A and B have been revised to 24' face to face. The road section has been updated to reflect the revised width. A dimension showing a minimum distance from proposed trees to back of curb has been added. A note indicating that on- street parking is not proposed has been added to the cross section detail. 0 L V N F U L N m d d v E CL 0 v 0 v M CR L; N M E. Ir N Ln N Ir rn E 0 0 CE C TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. 7. Sight lines and profiles need to be provided at each roadway intersection. Response: Sight lines have been added to the plan. Sight line profiles have been added to the plan on sheet C 1.4. $. The existing asphalt path along Shepherd's Ridge Road appears to be located outside of the existing pedestrian easement. Either additional easement in the open space and on lot 20 should be provided to Cover the asphalt path, or the asphalt path should be relocated within the existing pedestrian easement. Response: A pedestrian access easement has been added to the plan to serve the asphalt path. 9. An access easement is proposed for TMP 6217-313. Rather than creating an easement, could this area be conveyed to TMP 6217-313? Response: The proposed access easement has been removed. This area is not to be conveyed to TMP 62F -313. 10. Each fitting in the waterline creates the potential of leakage. It would be preferable for the waterline to be installed with radial deflection instead of angle fittings if located . under the paved surface. Response: The waterline angle fittings have been replaced with radial deflections. 11. It is our understanding that the adjacent parcel off of Belvedere $lvd will be constructed with private allies and that per Albemarle County Code, an inter - parcel connection with Dunlora V will not he allowed. As such, Road B will not be considered a stub out and the alternative Branch Type turnaround should be replaced with a cul -de -sac. Furthermore, this cul -de -sac will be a permanent turnaround and will. need to be located within dedicated right-of-way. Response: Inter - parcel connectivity was discussed and was encouraged by Albemarle County. Please note, no permits have been issued for TMP 62F -E2. 12. It seems that a connection of the pedestrian facilities within Dunlora V to Rio Road should be made. Response: Acknowledged. Copyright © 2015 Timmons Group — This proposal shall be considered Confidential & Proprietary until such time as a contract has been executed with the Client. Page 2 N b O� N N Q v e a Cd U W un V) c N 00 0 0 U N m c d v E CL 0 v v 0 v M CR Ln M Ir N 10 L'i Ln 01 N Ir M e °u vi 0 • 00000! a 0 TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. 13. It appears that there will be an unpaved island in the center of the cul -de -sac for Road A. This should be clearly noted on the plan. If there is not an unpaved island, the minimum radius of the cul -de -sac is 45' as noted in Appendix B(I) of the road Design Manual. This radius can be reduced to 30' when specifically approved by Albemarle County in consultation with emergency services_ 14. If there will be an unpaved island in the cul -de -sac, the minimum radius of the island is 30' as indicated in Appendix B(1) of the Road Design Manual. Furthermore, the travel - way around the island will need to be designed as a 1 -way travel -way in accordance with Table 3 in Appendix B(I) of the Road Design Manual, and on- street parking will not be allowed within the cul -de -sac. Response: The unpaved island for Road A has been removed. Currently, a radius of 30' is proposed. We are currently seeking approval from Albemarle County emergency services. 15. All deflection angles of the storm sewer system should be a minimum of 901. It appears that the minimum deflection is not met on the storm sewer located on Road B. Response: All storm sewer deflection angles have been checked /revised to ensure a minimum of 90 degrees. 16. Directional arrows showing the flow in the storm sewer system should be added to the plant. It is assumed that the underground detention adjacent to lot 9 will discharge to the storm sewer system in Rio Road. Response: Directional areas have been added. 17. Is the existing 15" RCP at Rio Road adequate to accommodate the discharge from the underground detention basin as well as the developed runoff that will by -pass the detention? Response: The detention basins as shown have been roughly sized such that the runoff leaving the facilities will be less than that of predevelopment runoff. Final calculations will be submitted with the Road and WPO plan to ensure adequacy. 18. Is the existing 18" RCP under Shepherd's Ridge .Road adequate to accommodate the developed runoff that is by-passing detention? Response: Final calculations will be submitted with the Road and WPO plan to ensure adequacy. Copyright © 2015 Timmons Group — This proposal shall be considered Confidential & Proprietary until such time as a contract has been executed with the Client. Page 3 N 0 N N v 0 U W un Y N a, T 0 L V N F U N m c v E a 0 a v 0 v q M CR Ln 01 M n Ir N 10 L'i Ln 01 N Ir e °u Co CG C TIMMONS GROUP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. 19. The Secondary Street Acceptance Rebuilations (SSAR) requires a minimum cf two external connections. It appears that a connection will not be available to Belvedere due to the development of the adjacent parcel and VDOT has indicated that there will not be a new connection to Rio Road. Written documentation from the Dunlora BOA needs to be provided indicating that the HOA will not allow a connection across land currently owned by the HOA adjacent to DunIora Drive in order for this SSAR requirement to be waived. Response: Acknowledged. Please see response to comment 11. We trust the above adequately addresses your comments. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 434 -327 -1690. Very Truly Yours, Clint Shifflett, P.E. Project Engineer Timmons Group Copyright © 2015 Timmons Group — This proposal shall be considered Confidential & Proprietary until such time as a contract has been executed with the Client. Page 4 N b O, N N Cd v e 0 L u W un Y c N a, T 00 00 0 0 c L V N F U N ttl C m c d v m s m E CL 0 m m m q M CR Ln M n Ir N 10 L'i Ln 01 N Ir M O u vi CO CG C