Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201500069 Correspondence Road Plan and Comps. 2015-04-06 . • ,r wr SHIMP PROJECT MANAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING C- April 6, 2015 Ms. Ellie Ray Regarding: SUB 2014 00176 Hilltop Preliminary Subdivision Plat Dear Ms. Ray I have attached 8 copies of the Road Plans for Hillbrook. Your comments for the Preliminary Subdivision Plat and the changes we have made in response are below. Please note that the Preliminary Subdivision Plat called for a public street, and we are now applying for a variation to make Hillbrook Court a private street. Planning Division 1. A plat meeting all the requirements for final subdivision plats per the subdivision ordinance. We will submit a final subdivision plat after we have heard back regarding the status of accepting Hillbrook Court as a private street. 2. Existing or platted streets. Clarify the existing public right-of-way line and the 30' prescriptive easement line. The right-of-way line looks much like other lines on the plan, so it is difficult to tell which lines depict r/w. Is the prescriptive easement only along the subject parcel? Why is it shown over the existing public right-of-way? We hope that the linework has been clarified with this submittal. Our surveyor was not able to find any records dedicating a portion of Old Brook Road to Public R.O.W., including a portion that is across the street from the development parcel. However, the areas to the north and south of this portion were dedicated. 3. Private&public easements. Verify that the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed private and public easements are shown. Existing easements should be labeled with the appropriate DB and PG reference. Proposed easements should be labeled with the intended holder. The plan proposes both sewer and storm on private lots; these utilities will require easements. Additionally, if sidewalk is not located within the proposed public right-of-way, a sidewalk easement will be required with the appropriate maintenance agreement. Existing and proposed easements have been labelled appropriately and a sidewalk easement has been added to the plan.A maintenance agreement will be submitted with the final subdivision plat. 4. Private &public easements. Will an easement be necessary for the off-site sewer connection? If so, show it on the plat and add impacted property owner(s) as signees. The off-site sewer connection has been re-designed according to the recommendation of the ACSA and VDOT reviewers, and the required plat has been submitted to the ACSA. 5. Proposed lots. Indicate on cover sheet that cluster development standards are being used. NNW' wrr The cover sheet has been updated to indicate that cluster development standards are being used. 6. Proposed lots. Clarify the total acreage of the proposed lots on the cover sheet. The sum of all lots is 1.68 acres not 1.70; using 1.700 (the sum of the rounded lot acreages) gives a total development area of 2.56 acres. The area summary table on the cover sheet has been updated and the computations should now be correct. 7. Proposed lots. Provide a frontage dimension for all proposed lots. A frontage dimension is now provided at the front building setback line for all proposed lots. 8. Right of further division of proposed lots. Please remove the development rights note (note #2) as development rights are not applicable on R-2 zoned land. The note has been removed. 9. Instrument creating property proposed for subdivision. The legal reference provided should be a Will Book reference, not a Deed Book reference. The legal reference has been updated to indicate the Will Book and Page. 10. Topography. Label the existing topography. A field-run topographic survey has replaced the prior GPS topographic data. 11. Zoning classification. Add Airport Impact Area(AIA)to the Zoning note. The Zoning note has been updated to indicate that the parcel is within the Airport Impact Area. 12. Frontage and lot width measurements. The required frontage may be reduced on a cul-de-sac provided driveway separation meets VDOT standards. However, minimum lot width must be maintained between the front and rear yards; the front setback may need to be moved back to where minimum lot width is achieved. The minimum 65' lot width has been shown at the front setback line for all lots. 13. Environmental standards. To qualify for the bonus factor for maintenance of existing wooded areas you must show that the area maintained meets the definition of"wooded area" in Section 3. A detailed map of the location and species of each tree on the property will be provided with the next submittal. 14. Environmental standards. To qualify for this bonus, a conservation plan as specified in section 32.7.9 is required. A conservation checklist and tree protection fencing have been added to the plan. 15. Instrument evidencing maintenance of certain improvements. A maintenance agreement will be required for the proposed sidewalks (if they remain outside of the proposed public right-of-way) and the open space parcel. A maintenance agreement for the street, sidewalk, landscaping, and open space will be submitted with the final plat. 16. Sidewalks and planting strips. Label and dimension the sidewalks and planting strips. Planting strips must be 6' wide. In the plan view and the typical road section, the sidewalks are labelled to be 5'wide and the planting strip is labelled to be 6' wide. Engineering Division 1. Entrances should not exceed 4% grade for a distance of 40' from the intersected street, measured anywhere in the entrance [18-4.12.17]. A landing has been provided for the private street that the County Engineer has indicated will be adequate. 2. Show access/easement to open space if area is dedicated to HOA. An access easement to the open space has been added to the plans. 3. Maximum driveway slope is 16%. Please show that driveways do not exceed this slope for all lots. Driveway slopes and spot elevations have been added for all lots. 4. The underground detention needs to be deep enough but also be able to connect to the existing inlet on Old Brook Rd. This can be verified with the VSMP application. The VSMP application will include detailed plans, profiles, and sections for the storm facilities. 5. Show easements around SWM facilities. This will need to be dimensioned on the plat. The SWM facilities will be privately maintained. All necessary easements will be shown and dimensioned on the plat. 6. Show sight distance easements and dimension. A sight distance easement has been added. It will be dimensioned in the final plat. 7. flow will quality requirements be addressed? This can be clarified with a VSMP application, but easements will need to be shown prior to plat approval. A portion of the site's runoff will be treated with an infiltration facility. The remainder of the water quality requirement will be met through the purchase of off-site credits. 8. VDOT approval is required for the proposed public road. As noted above, we are hoping to receive acceptance of the road as private. 9. The sanitary sewer lateral for lot 4 will need an easement. Shift the sanitary sewer lateral for lot 4 off lot 3 to avoid an easement. The lateral has been re-designed to avoid an easement. 10. Label road as Public Road. The road has been labelled "Private R.O.W."to be consistent with the application. 11. A road plan approval and a road bond will be required prior to the approval of this plat. So noted. 12. Please dimension all easements on the plat. The final subdivision plat will include metes and bounds for all easements. 13. An inlet should be provided in front of lot 6 to avoid runoff into Old Brook Road. If an inlet is not provided, please show that the released runoff can be captured with the existing inlet on Old Brook Road. The drainage divides are changing with this project so the effect of the runoff into an older system should be verified. This analysis can be included when checking channel protection. The inlets have been relocated to the edge of the proposed entrance, matching the low point of Hillbrook Court. Their drainage areas and the capacity of the existing system will be verified with the WPO submittal. ACSA 1. If the proposed sewer connection in Hearthglow Lane is to remain, a reconfiguration of the alignment per VDOT and ACSA comments will be required. This sewer connection may require offsite easements. The sewer connection has been re-designed as suggested in comments#2 and#4, and the connection in Hearthglow Lane has been eliminated. 2. The ACSA would like the applicant to further explore a sanitary sewer connection(via doghouse manhole)to the existing sanitary sewer main on TMP# 46A2-7-F. A connection to this sewer would reduce your overall sewer installation by approximately 340 linear feet. This would also reduce the cost of restoration in an existing VDOT row, traffic control measures and the vertical feet of manholes that will be required. This option is much better than the original planned connection at Hearthglow Lane and has been designed in this submittal. 3. Show proposed ACSA easements and call them out. Proposed ACSA easements for water and sewer have been drawn and labelled. 4. Provide a summary of attempts to acquire a sanitary sewer easement on TMP#46-A2-7-F. Also provide a written response from the HOA representative. If you provide contact information for the HOA representative, the ACSA can contact the representative to address any questions or concerns they may have about a proposed public sewer connection. We have negotiated with the Raintree HOW and obtained an easement, which has been submitted to the ACSA. 5. Correctly show water meter locations. Water meters are now shown in the planting strip between the sidewalk and the back of curb. 6. Will there be any irrigation on this site? There is no irrigation planned for this site. 7. Add cover note that the ACSA water and sewer easements are to be centered on the utilities as- built location. The note has been added to the cover sheet. Fire& Rescue 1. Radii entering on to Hilltop Court shall not be less than 25 ft. The radii have been called out as 25'. 2. Cul-de-sac shall be 96ft FC/FC. As previously discussed, the cul-de-sac radius has been set at 35' 3. Fire Flow test required before final approval. Required fire flow shall be 1000 gpm @ 20 psi. The ACSA will conduct a Fire Flow test as soon as possible, and before final approval, to verify sufficient pressure and flow. VDOT 1. As shown on the preliminary plat,the sidewalk would need to be located within an easement and maintained through a maintenance agreement. A sidewalk easement is shown and labelled on the plans.A maintenance agreement will be submitted with the final plat. 2. Appendix B (1) of the Road Design Manual allows for a cul-de-sac to have a minimum radius of 30' on short, low volume roads provided that emergency services has no objection. Fire and Rescue has allowed a radius of 35'. Nur- 3. Available intersection sight distance at the proposed connection to Old Brook Road needs to be confirmed. It is likely that significant slope grading will be required to provide adequate sight distance. In addition, on street parking along Old Brook Road would likely need to be restricted near the proposed street connection so that parked cars to not impact the sight distance. Sight distance plan and profile are included on this submittal, as are signs restricting the parking. 4. The sewer route through Old Brook Road is unacceptable. The sewer line will need to either: a. Cross Old Brook and run along the shoulder on the north side of Old Brook. b. Run along the shoulder on the south side of Old Brook. c. Or preferable, connect to the existing sanitary sewer that runs on TMP 46A2-7-F. This option likely would require obtaining an easement to make the connection. The preferred connection to the existing sanitary sewer that runs on TMP 46A2-7-F is much better, and is now specified in the design documents. E911 1. The name "Hilltop Court" cannot be used for this development. The applicant should contact this office with a list of three (3) alternative names for approval. The street name has been changed to Hillbrook Court. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I may be reached at: Justin anshimp-engineering.com or by phone at 434-953-6116. Best Re•. Ju•tin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. SFIIMP PROJECT MANAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING April 8, 2015 Michelle Roberge Glenn Brooks 8 JB 20 IS t0cl .i-I g 2 ooh Regarding: SUB-2014-00476 Hilltop Private Road Request Dear Ms. Roberge and Mr. Brooks, As discussed during our meeting March 26,we are requesting authorization of Hillbrook Court as a private street to reduce earthwork requirements, in compliance with Albemarle County Code Sec. 14-233A, under the general welfare provision. We believe that authorization will serve the public welfare by substantially reducing the number of trucks running through an existing residential neighborhood, as well as reducing the duration of construction. This request complies with all requirements of Albemarle County Code Sec. 14-234C as follows: 1. The private street will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonable expected to be generated by the subdivision. The development will comprise six single-family lots, with an ITE Code 210 traffic generation of 60 ADT. Because the site is surrounded on all sides by existing residential lots, Hillbrook Court will not be extended or further developed. The private street is therefore more than adequate to carry the expected traffic volume. 2. The comprehensive plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of the proposed private street. No public street is provided in the comprehensive plan for this approximate location, as it is only serving a single large lot. 3. The fee of the private street will be owned by the owner of each lot abutting the right-of-way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision, subject in either case to any easement for the benefit of all lots served by the street. A homeowners'association will be formed and dues will be collected from the homeowners to cover all costs related to maintaining the private street, the sidewalk, the landscaping strip, the storm sewer, the stormwater management facilities, and the preserved open space lot. 4. Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, the private street will not serve through traffic nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location. The proposed private street is a 200' cul de sac which will only serve residents of the surrounding homes, and it connects to Old Brook Road in only one location. 5. If applicable, the private street has been approved in accordance with section 30.3, flood hazard overlay district, of the zoning ordinance and other applicable law. There is no flood hazard in the development parcel. N.. The attached exhibits demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the private road authorization statutes: Exhibit 1: Public Street Profile v. Private Street Profile. Exhibit 2: Site Grading with Public Street Exhibit 3: Site Grading with Private Street Exhibit 4: Carlson Earthwork Reports The results of the earthwork analysis are tabulated below: Cut(CY) Public Private Reduction Street Street ROW Only 3,037 2,051 32.5% Full Site 12,197 4,581 62.4% Earthwork Calculations Because the proposed driveways are short—only about 20' behind the sidewalk—the road grade is the primary factor driving the grading of the site. VDOT's requirement of a 50' landing at 2%therefore forces the whole site to a lower grade, if all other factors are held constant. This ultimately results in approximately 423 additional truckloads of dirt being hauled off the site. We believe Hillbrook Court should be authorized as a private street. If you find any issues with this request, or if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I may be reached at: Justin@shimp-engineering.com or by phone at 434-953-6116. Best Regards, Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. N41111110' 'gale A A Cn (T (T Cn - co co O O O (Ji O CT O (T + °o PVC STA. 10+146.99 PVC ELEV. 492.97 .o 13 N E I �.,i m> . v s< PVC .TA. 10+14.99 EDGE OF PAVEMENT p I s PVC LEV. 492.97 EX. OLD BROOK ROAD +g< ..<— ,. Nm-Nice STA 10+14.99 8<C("7 t+ itT; -o<DD ELEV. 492.93 = I IV o IVY ) ° <�°C "42 N °o r� N P STA. 10+34.93 PVT STA. 10+2+.99 t• ---.1 : P ELEV. 493.37 PVT ELEV. 492.97 PVC .TA. 10+39:99 PVC LEV. 493.67 v v ' m N mu) 1 x °,co• + °• 0K00��1 1 D PVC STA 10+64.99 0 4,0° \ o •PVC ELEV. 493.77 ca-c):120,1: ∎, (o. 5 54 PVT .TA. 10+79.99 '1 w �v 55.�$ a LEV. 497.45 (63< e,-,T A. v CO \ CO C •, o -PVT STA. C) ° )VT ELEV. 496.'7 c PVC S"A. 11+06.29 DRIVEWAY _MS 1 & 6 Cn PVC _LEV. 497.15 I PVC STA. 1 +12.29 PVC ELEV. 501.62 m EDGE OF CUL DE SAC D U J = s \ \ v STA. 11+27.29 m co o N ssA 07C� D NV rN C� , O g O°P3mni- 7 O g g (� ________ C...:‹ m _? OnOW C.�/ N 74.Oc AJ+ li w 77 I�VT STA. 11+60.61 m PVT STA. 11+6'.29 �VT ELEV. 506.19 cn PVT ELEV. 502 75 ENTER OF CUL DE SAC DRIVEWAY LO • 2 & 5 / STA. 11+62.29 rn S / °q` DRIVEWAY 015 3 & 4 I AND OF CUL DE SAC +--- -- -- -- --_STA_11+97 79 °O I v I <' 0 , m / N i m r. U O Cn O (T O U \ \ \ \ \ o OLD MORI ,----- l \l' ROAD r ,....3 ,... ...... is / rrAll,ru l I \ / f 1 - _- ���y1' - } __iii . --=_:- _ ; = 3. o vbl i II II I V' ' q p 1` II�� 1 ` 1 ____ AO ‘1111:, _ _l 02 _/ ii" \ Nk' ,---- R 1 , ="q O ‘, v 14 '— // /4" �� 4 —� N — • S \\ / 41414-15p-0-8 - I— �� X,7 , :// J�Jl 0--ZoS-- 566 — ryL jSg 4s \\ __ 'tc�Hn 7 y0'� Ni—:\ \\ I 498 _ Ttt1T1h1IEI W 20 O , ro°m°m _,-- \ --- ono --- - i� co _- _ I o C \ -- ___- - C7 rn o \\�\ \\\ -----'---- W \ \ r- m D m Z v ' 1 \ / C �'�� — :OLD BROOK ROAD —1 / ,1 zap \\ -- __ ��_-__ _;_— -_ 1 zos . 'j 'I' ` \\\ - _j � o� = 8 __ ..\\ \_____, NL o �� I N 0 - &-9- 1111 ags q.m 3 a �0 � VI I �1 �� _\-1) \ lir. f____ ____A i_ 1 --- _ __ ., 1 ,,,,,_ wP,s '` IjiZt2 og' _ /A � �� g‘r** 2 ,-- S. \_t-\\—— — N. / i i, I ---' I.° a i�?� ——zos — eoy ss 1,6' _ /���� � 2 y�zpt �s , o�P -- — vr – — ° \ 1 e 1 r / –—oos—- —\`£}?,� / zos N_ // \V i i to w —' 0 0 I -/ W 0 0 \ — —— / v a$ ——— /——\ \\\——— —-4 ' \ \ -- �( i D D I— -__------- z x Exhibit 4: Carlson Reports ETO Public ROW volumes by Triangulation (Prisms) Mon Apr 06 15:34:15 2015 Existing surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - old Brook Rd\Carlson\xtopo.tin Final surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - old Brook Rd\Carlson\new.tin Cut volume: 82,012.7 C.F. , 3,037.51 C.Y. Fill volume: 25.5 C.F. , 0.94 C.Y. Area in Cut : 9,442. 5 S.F. , 0.22 Acres Area in Fill : 47.9 S.F. , 0.00 Acres Total inclusion area: 9,490.4 S.F. , 0.22 Acres Average Cut Depth: 8.69 feet Cut to Fill ratio: 3217.14 Export volume: 3,036.6 C.Y. Elevation Change To Reach Balance: 8.639 volume Change Per .1 ft: 35.1 C.Y. Cut (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 13941.80 Fill (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 4.33 Page 1 a "Now ETO Private ROW volumes by Triangulation (Prisms) Mon Apr 06 17:29:23 2015 Existing Surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - Old Brook Rd\Carlson\xtopo.tin Final Surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - old Brook Rd\Carlson\new.tin Cut volume: 58,136.9 C.F. , 2,153.22 C.Y. Fill volume: 2,763.0 C.F. , 102.33 C.Y. Area in Cut : 7,747.3 S.F. , 0.18 Acres Area in Fill : 1,743.3 S.F. , 0.04 Acres Total inclusion area: 9,490.6 S.F. , 0.22 Acres Average Cut Depth: 7. 50 feet Average Fill Depth: 1.58 feet Cut to Fill ratio: 21.04 Export Volume: 2,050.9 C.Y. Elevation Change To Reach Balance: 5.835 volume Change Per .1 ft: 35.2 C.Y. Cut (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 9882.90 Fill (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 469.69 Page 1 ETO Public Street volumes by Triangulation (Prisms) Thu Mar 26 11:52:34 2015 Existing Surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - old Brook Rd\Carlson\xtopo.tin Final Surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - Old Brook Rd\Carlson\new.tin Cut volume: 336,926.1 C.F. , 12,478.74 C.Y. Fill volume: 7,679.2 C.F. , 284.41 C.Y. Area in Cut : 66,710.6 S.F. , 1.53 Acres Area in Fill : 10,155.4 S.F. , 0.23 Acres Total inclusion area: 76,881.3 S.F. , 1.76 Acres Average Cut Depth: 5.05 feet Average Fill Depth: 0.76 feet Cut to Fill ratio: 43.88 Export volume: 12,194.3 C.Y. Elevation Change To Reach Balance: 4.283 volume Change Per .1 ft: 284.7 C.Y. Cut (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 7070.30 Fill (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 161.15 Page 1 ETO Private Street Volumes by Triangulation (Prisms) Mon Apr 06 17:28:33 2015 Existing Surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - old Brook Rd\Carlson\xtopo.tin Final Surface: S:\Projects\13.029 - old Brook Rd\Carlson\new.tin Cut volume: 181,801.4 C.F. , 6,733.39 C.Y. Fill volume: 58,122.0 C.F. , 2,152.67 C.Y. Area in Cut : 40,577.7 S.F. , 0.93 Acres Area in Fill : 30, 535.8 S.F. , 0.70 Acres Total inclusion area: 71,242.5 S.F. , 1.64 Acres Average Cut Depth: 4.48 feet Average Fill Depth: 1.90 feet Cut to Fill ratio: 3.13 Export Volume: 4,580.7 C.Y. Elevation Change To Reach Balance: 1.736 Volume Change Per .1 ft: 263.9 C.Y. Cut (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 4117.01 Fill (C.Y.) / Area (acres) : 1316.21 Page 1 a r SHIMP PROJECT IVINAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING Y June 4, 2015 Ms. Ellie Ray Regarding: SUB 2015 00069 Hillbrook Road Plans Dear Ms. Ray, We have submitted revisions to the Road Plans for Hillbrook. Your comments for the first submittal and the changes we have made in response are below. 1. [Comment] This application has been reviewed for items relevant to the Road Plans only. Additional comments regarding requirements for Final Plat approval will be provided when the Final Plat is submitted. 2. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. 3. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat; however, it appears additional easements for storm sewer will be required. Additional easements for storm sewer are called out on this set of plans. 4. [14-302(A)4&5] Private &public easements. Will an easement be necessary for the off-site sewer connection? If so, show it on the plat and add impacted property owner(s) as signees. • Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. However, this easement should be in place prior to the approval of any construction activities on the neighboring parcel. The easement for the off-site sewer connection has been platted and is shown in this submittal. 5. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. 6. [14-302(A)8] Proposed lots. Indicate on the cover sheet that cluster development standards are being used. • The open space provided does not meet the standard for a cluster development; a minimum of 25% is required. This will be reviewed in more detail on the Final Plat, but is being included in this comment letter in case it changes the road design. The boundary for the dedicated open space has been updated to meet the 25% requirement. The computation is on the cover sheet. 7. [14-302(A)8] Proposed lots. Provide a frontage dimension for all proposed lots. • Frontage is measured as a straight line not an arc; some lots may not meet the frontage requirement. This will be reviewed in more detail on the Final Plat. The frontage dimension has been changed and should now be shown correctly. 8. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. 9. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. 10. Comment addressed. 11. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. 12. [18-4.6.1] Frontage and lot width measurements. The required frontage may be reduced on a cul- de-sac provided driveway separation meets VDOT standards. However, minimum lot width must be maintained between the front and rear yards; the front setback may need to be moved back to where minimum lot width is achieved. • Frontage is measured as a straight line not an arc; some lots may not meet the frontage requirement. This will be reviewed in more detail on the Final Plat. The frontage dimension has been changed and should now be shown correctly. 13. [18-14.4.1] Environmental standards. To qualify for the bonus factor for maintenance of existing wooded areas you must show that the area maintained meets the definition of`wooded area' in Section 3. • This information is not included in the road plans, it must be provided prior to Road Plan approval. A map showing existing trees has been added to the landscape plan for this submittal. 14. [18-14.4.1] Environmental standards. To qualify for this bonus, a conservation plan as specified in section 32.7.9 is required. • The conservation plan checklist must be completed and signed. A completed and signed conservation plan checklist has been added to the plan. 15. Will be reviewed with the Final Plat. 16. Comment addressed. 17. [32.7.9.5] Street trees. The plant counts in the landscape schedule do not match the number of symbols shown on the plan; please verify and revise so that the plan and schedule are consistent. Additionally, some street trees are shown on top of utilities or too close to proposed driveways; relocate street trees with conflicts to appropriate locations. The landscaping plan has been revised to show the same number of plants as the schedule and the trees have been moved away from utilities and proposed driveways.Additionally, landscaping easements have been added around the trees that are now outside of the planting strip. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I may be reached at: Justin anshimp-engineering.com or by phone at 434-953-6116. Best Regards, Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. Nose SAIMP PROJECT AM NAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING Y ) June 4, 2015 Justin Deel Regarding: SUB 2015 00069 Hillbrook Road Plans Dear Mr. Deel, I have attached six copies of the Road Plans for Hillbrook. Your comments for the first submittal and the changes we have made in response are below. 1. Please show limits of sidewalk replacement and CG-6 removal. The limits of sidewalk replacement and CG-6 removal are now shown in the existing conditions/demolition plan sheet. 2. Please explain note "Area to be Vacated 4,470 SF" on existing conditions sheet. Per a survey by Roudabush, Gale, and Associates dated 10/18/2014, a portion of Old Brook Road in front of the development parcel was never dedicated to public right-of-way, and the current property line passes approximately through the centerline of the road.We are dedicating this portion of the property to VDOT. The note has been revised to state "5,317 SF to be dedicated to VDOT." 3. Please show and label managed slopes. Managed slopes are now delineated with a hatch and labelled. 4. Show stationing at 50' minimum on plans and profiles. 50'stationing is now shown on the road profile and all plan views. 5. Please provide dimensions for and clearly show extent of the private storm sewer easement along Old Brook Rd. The private storm sewer easement along Old Brook Road will be delineated with metes and bounds with the subdivision plat. The edge farthest from the road is 10' off the centerline of the pipe. 6. Should there be a separate easement for sidewalks as they are outside of the street ROW? A sidewalk easement is now shown on the C3 and C6. 7. Please label proposed grade on road profile. Show and label crossdrains and utilities on profiles. The proposed grade is now labelled on the road profile. Crossdrains and utilities are now shown and labelled on profiles. 8. Provide a drainage plan. Please show excess drainage will not be flowing into Old Brook Road. Provide storm sewer profile(s). What will inlet 5A be capturing? Pre-cast inlets will obviously lessen your curb entrance radii, do these have to be placed on the entrance? The drainage plan is included with this submittal,with an LD-204 showing that excess drainage will not be flowing into Old Brook Road and storm sewer profiles. The inlets have been re-located to be outside of the curb entrance radii. • 9. Provide details and profiles for proposed new storm sewer on Old Brook Road. Details and profiles are now provided for proposed new storm sewer on Old Brook Road. 10. Although this is intended to be a private street, VDOT approval is required for intersection and utility improvements along Old Brook Road. Plans have been submitted to VDOT and we are working to address their comments. 11. Provide pavement design calculations. Pavement design calculations are attached to this letter. 12. Provide sidewalk detail. A separate sidewalk detail has been provided with this submittal. Fire Marshal Comment Fire Flow test required. Fire Flow needed is 1,000 gpm @ 20 psi. A fire flow test has been requested, and the results will be included with the next submittal. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I may be reached at: Justin @shimp-engineering.com or by phone at 434-953-6116. Best Regards, Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. SHIMP PROJECT MANAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING July 14, 2015 Ms. Ellie Ray Regarding: SUB 2015 00069 Hillbrook Road Plans Dear Ms. Ray, We have submitted revisions to the Road Plans for Hillbrook. Your comments for the first submittal and the changes we have made in response are below. 1. The note below the Wooded Area Tabulation references a 26,707 SF conservation area, while the preserved wooded space is labelled as 23,764 SF; please clarify and revise, if necessary. In the previous submittal,the open space was not clearly differentiated from the wooded area. For this submittal,we have labelled the open space parcel as "Open Space, Dedicated to HOA, 27,555 SF." This includes both the preserved wooded space and the bioretention facility. To distinguish between the two, we have added a tree preservation easement around the bioretention facility, the area of which is 23,696 SF. Please let us know if we can clarify the plan any further. 2. The `new canopy' number in the tree canopy calculation doesn't match that provided in the Landscape Schedule; verify and revise. Thank you for catching this error.We have verified the tree count and canopy calculation and revised to show accurate numbers. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I may be reached at: Justin at shimp-engineerinq.com or by phone at 434-953-6116. Best Regards, Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. SAINIP PROJECT ( IAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING July 24, 2015 Justin Deel Regarding: SUB 2015 00069 Hillbrook Road Plans Dear Mr. Deel, I have attached ten copies of the Road Plans for Hillbrook, as the ACSA has requested three. Please let me know if any additional copies would be helpful. Your comments for the second submittal and the changes we have made in response are below. 8. (Rev. 1) Comment partially addressed. Drainage area plan not found. An 11"x17"drainage area plan has been attached to the calculation packet for this submittal. If a black and white full size drainage area plan would be easier for you to review, please email me at lauren @shimp- engineering.com or call me at 434.227.5140 x4 and I will deliver one as soon as possible. Revision 1 Comments: 13. Please reflect the requested changes to the overall SWM/drainage plan from the 26 June 2015 VSMP review letter. This submittal reflects the changes requested in the 26 June 2015 VSMP review letter as discussed in our meeting on July 9, 2015. Planning Comments: A separate comment response letter is provided for comments by Ellie Ray. Fire Marshal Comment Fire Flow test required. Fire Flow needed is 1,000 gpm @ 20 psi. A fire flow calculation has been attached to the calculation packet for this submittal. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I will be out of the office from July 27-31; during this time, please contact Justin Shimp at: Justin(a,shimp-enqineerinq.com or by phone at 434- 953-6116. Best Regards, 04100& Lauren Gilroy Shimp Engineering, P.C. SHIMP PROJECT MAITAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERINGL'.' July 24, 2015 Troy Austin, PE Area Land Use Engineer Culpeper District Regarding: SUB 2015 00069 Hillbrook Road Plans Dear Mr. Austin, We have submitted revisions to the Road Plans for Hillbrook. Your comments for the first submittal and the changes we have made in response are below. 1. It appears that additional no parking signs may be necessary to better define the areas along Old Brook Road. Additional no parking signs are now provided to clarify the ban on parking near the intersection of Old Brook Road and Hil!brook Court. 2. The"Private Storm Sewer Easement"along Old Brook Road should not be private as VDOT will maintain the storm sewer between structures 2 and X4 The storm design in the area has been updated per the phone conversation on July 23, and the storm sewer easement is now private. 3. The erosion and sediment control plan needs to be provided for review. This can be a separate submittal (WPO for example). Two additional copies of the VSMP plan have been attached to the current WPO submittal, and we have requested that the County forward them to you. 4. Structure 1, a new MH-1, appears to be included only as a feature of the underground detention system. As such, this structure should be removed from the right-of-way. Furthermore, as designed, there will always be standing water in structure 2. As this is a drop inlet that will be maintained by VDOT, the storm sewer needs to be revised so that there will not be standing water in this structure. The storm design has been updated to remove MH-1 from the right of way and to privately maintained, so that no part of the detention system is in VDOT maintained areas.Additionally,the drafting on STM-2 has been corrected to show flow away from the structure from both pipes, to eliminate standing water. 5. We do not support a marked crosswalk at this location and the crosswalk and CG-12 in for the sidewalk on the western side of Old Brook Road should be removed. The marked crosswalk and CG-12 at this location have been removed to reduce potential pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. 6. We continue to recommend that the sidewalk along Hillbrook Court be removed. The response letter to our prior review indicates that the engineer/developer would like to explore other options for connecting with the existing pedestrian facilities. Have any other options been proposed? Other options for pedestrian connection have been explored, and found to be cost-prohibitive, as many hundreds of feet of sidewalk would be required to tie in to the sidewalk on the east side of Old Brook Road. The internal sidewalk for the development is required by County Code. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest opportunity. I may be reached at: Justin at7shimp-engineerinq.com or by phone at 434-953-6116. Best Re, - , , J stin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C.