HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201500028 Action Letter 2015-07-24 (2)�� ' •mow. r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
July 24, 2015
Chris Mulligan
Roudabush & Gale
914 Monticello Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP - 2015 -028 Old Trail Blocks 10, 16, 17/18- Initial Site Plan
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.
The final site plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the following items are
received:
A final site plan that satisfies all of the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code
and addresses requirements attached to this letter from the Site Review Committee Members.
Please note that the comments from Albemarle County Police are recommendations and are not
requirements that need to be addressed. There may also be additional recommendations from
reviewers, please correspond directly with the reviewer concerning any questions regarding
recommendations or requirements.
A fee of $1,500.
Please submit 8 copies of the final plans to the Community Development Department. The assigned
Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies (except for ACSA, please submit 3
copies directly to them). Once you receive the first set of comments on the final site plan, please work
with each reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements.
The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for
signature until tentative approvals from Site Review Committee members have been obtained.
If you have any questions about the conditions or the submittal requirements please feel free to contact
me at Extension 3004, myaniglos @albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
Megan Yaniglos
Principal Planner
�YpF AL��,
4 �P
V l C?
t -1.
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Chris Mulligan (cmulligan @roudabush.com)
From: Megan Yaniglos- Principal Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: July 24, 2015
Subject: SDP - 2015 -028 Old Trail- Blocks 10, 16, 17/18- Initial Site Plan
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department Community
Development will recommend approve the plan referred to above when the following items
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 to the Albemarle
County Code.]
Requirements:
1. [32.5.2; Proffers /COD] Provide a table that contains all the information regarding all the
proposed blocks, built and unbuilt /under review. This table is necessary to track all the
requirements of the ZMA.
2. [32.5.2] Will any of the lots be proposed as affordable? A minimum of 15% of affordable
units are required per the proffer. Identify which lots /units will be affordable.
3. [32.5.2] Break up the parking calculations. Two spaces are required for each single
family detached unit, and 2.25 for each single family attached /townhouse unit. It is also
unclear if on street spaces are being counted towards parking.
4. [32.5.2] An easement for the sidewalks and planting strips will need to be established
to assure maintenance of these areas. Generally, the County prefers that these areas be
within the right of way. Is there a reason why these need to be within the lots? All other
portions of Old Trail have the sidewalks and planting strips within the right of way. Also,
to be consistent with the currently deferred rezoning submittal, it might be good to
match those setbacks proposed in that document and have the landscape and sidewalk
within the right of way.
5. [32.5.2] Provide information on lot coverage. This can be included in the table requested
in comment #2.
6. [Variations /Exceptions] The requests are under review and will be scheduled shortly for
the PC and the Board, as applicable. Staff will be in touch concerning the dates.
Please contact Megan Yaniglos at the Department of Community Development 296-
5832 ext. 3004 for further information.
. "lRGSl'�ZA
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Project: Old Trail Village Block 10, 16 & 17/18 - Initial
Plan preparer: Bill Ledbetter, Raleigh Davis — Roudabush, Gale & Assoc, Inc
914 Monticello Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902, bledbettergroudabush.com,
rdavis@roudabush. com
Owner or rep.: March Mountain Properties LLC [1005 Heathercroft Circle, Suite 100]
Dave Brockman, dave(a)oldtrailvilla eg com
Plan received date: 3 June 2015
Date of comments: 9 Jul 2015
Reviewer: John Anderson
Project Coordinator: Megan Yaniglos
SDP2015 -00028
1. RW — Extend RW of public /private streets one foot (1') behind sidewalks consistent with RW shown for
approved road plans, prior blocks of development at Old Trail Village. Ref. sheet 10, 61' PUBLIC RW,
Fielding Run Drive; sheet 11, 55' Existing Public R -O -W, Rowcross Street.
2. To extent practical, keep all storm drain pipes within right of way. Note, for example, pipe at NE corner,
Lot 8 (Upland and Rowcross); at SE corner, Lot 8 (Alley and Rowcross); or at SE comer, Lot 14 (Golf
Drive and Rowcross). Please accept this comment applicable to future design. Maintenance responsibility
is unworkable if design links inlets via pipes that cross lots via easements that propose to alternate public
and private maintenance. Parties with maintenance responsibility may rightly contest responsibility. It will
save time during the review process if design abandons narrow right -of -way and establish right -of -way 1'
beyond sidewalks (standard design practice). VDOT dedicates public right -of -way to the County, which
does not have a public works department to maintain public storm drain facilities.
3. 38' CL radius, Rowcross, sheet 8, does not meet public street standards. Please revise.
4. Alley does not provide road frontage for Lots 17 -21 (block 17, sheet 8); propose street.
5. Alley does not provide road frontage for Lots 10 -14 (block 17, sheet 7); propose street, not alley.
Public /private street standards apply to proposed travel ways serving Lots 10 -14 and 17 -21 (block 17/18).
6. Sheet 8 — Eliminate 16 perpendicular parking spaces at open space off Alley opposite Court Mont — parallel
parking only. Concerns: safety (proximity to street comers; reverse maneuvers); sight distance (parked
vehicles obstruct). [VDOT Road Design Manual, Appendix B.1 A.D. — perpendicular, on- street parking:
normally prohibited; Also, Road Design Manual, Appendix Q.
For fanal site plan
7. Label stream buffer (dashed lines), sheets 5, 8.
8. Position SWM facilities (ponds) outside stream buffers.
9. Provide guardrail, Rowcross, between street and SWM pond.
10. Switch labels near SWM Pond that read proposed sanitary manhole (typical), proposed storm sewer M.H.
(sheets 8, 11).
11. Drainage, sheet 13, Lots 10 -15: Engineering review drainage plan checklist: "Provisions and easements for
drainage across 3 or more lots. Dense development where fencing, decking, etc is expected should provide
yard inlets and pipes in easements rather than ditches. {Policy }" Provide yard inlet as necessary.
12. Check loop street design at open space off Alley opposite Court Mont against 14- 412.A.2: sight distance
not less than 100', radius for horizontal curvature 40' or greater.
13. SWM —if proposed SWM facilities are located on County property, provide HOA Maintenance
Agreements. Reserve Drainage & Access Easement/s to SWM facilities on Parks and Recreation property
for OTV HOA.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
14. Ensure proposed SWM facilities and development are consistent with revised Master (Conceptual) prepared
by Stantec. Conceptual SWMP approved with ZMA200400024 governs site plan/subdivision development
with respect to state regulations until and unless a revised Master plan is approved.
Contact John Anderson, Engineering Dept, if any questions. ianderson2(&albemarle.org / 434 - 296 -5832 -0069
Thank you
File: SDP201500028 -Old Trail blocks 10, 16, 17 -18 070915 ISP
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Wpeper Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
July 7, 2015
Ms. Megan Yaniglos
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP -2015 -00028 - Old Trail Blocks 10, 16, 17 & 18
Dear Ms. Yaniglos:
We have reviewed the Initial Site plan, submitted by Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc., with a
plan date of May 8, 2015, and we offer the following comments:
1. All sheets should be signed by a professional engineer or clearly marked "Preliminary".
2. A plan legend should be provided.
3. The design speed should be provided on the plan sheets and profiles.
4. The existing and proposed curb types and signage should be clearly labeled throughout
the plan sheets.
5. The radius of all intersection returns, measured from the face of curb, should be labeled.
The minimum radius is 25'.
6. The angle between road centerlines at each skew should be clearly labeled.
7. All existing and proposed easements within or immediately adjacent to State maintained
right -of -way should be clearly labeled (include the use and legal reference).
8. Clearly identify all roadways to remain privately maintained on the layout sheets.
9. When on street parking is on one side only, clearly identify the side of street the parking
will be located, including the location of "No Parking" signs.
10. Road profiles should be included with this submittal.
11. Line of sight profiles should be included with this submittal. Sight line triangles should
include the available sight distance, offset from the edge of travel way and centerline
offset.
12. Utility profiles and computations should be provided.
13. A detail should be provided showing the roadway layout with ADT of each roadway.
14. Roadway Typical Section: The sidewalk and bufferplanting strip cross -slope should be
shown graphically. Street trees should also be shown graphically with a dimension to the
back of curb as applicable. The roadway design speed should also be identified.
15. Pavement Marking/Signage Plan
a. Pavement markings and signage should be shown on the plan view and to scale.
b. All markings and appropriate signage shall be shown in accordance with the
current version of the MUTCD and/or the Virginia Supplement to the MUTCD.
c. Individual signs should have the MUTCD sign label reference included on the
plan.
I6. We prefer all utilities to cross perpendicular to the street. For example: the sanitary sewer
from the Alley, Block 16, crossing Upland Drive as well as the sewer crossing Golf
Drive, Block 16.
17. For ease of review all storm and sanitary structure labels should be added to the plan
sheets.
18. When an open cut is necessary for a utility tie -in it should be done in accordance with the
land use permit (LUP -OC) — Open -cut Pavement Restoration Requirements.
19. Sight lines should be provided for the Alley entrance, in Block 17, onto Fielding Run
Drive.
20. The minimum centerline radius (up to 2000 ADT) is 200'. The centerline radius, Block
18 Rowcross, should be updated accordingly.
21. A multi -way stop control can be useful as a safety measure at intersections provided
certain traffic conditions exist. An engineering study should be performed to determine if
multi -way stops should be installed. For example: the intersection of Golf Drive and
Fielding Run Drive as well as intersection of Upland Drive and Golf Drive.
If you need further information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me
at (434) 422 -9894.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. Plaster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Review Comments
DP201600028
Project Name: old Trail Village - Blocks 10, 16, & 17!18
Date Completed: ' Thursday, June 04, 2015
Reviewer: Andrew Slack
DepartmentfDivisionfAgency: E911
Reviews Comments:
Final Site Development Plan
Review status: I Requested Changes F-] I
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 071061 1515
Review Comments
DP201600028
Project Name: old Trail Village - Blocks 10, 16, & 17!18
Date Completed: ' Monday, July 06, 2015 Final Site Development Plan
Reviewer: Robbie Gilmer
D e pa rtm e ntfD ivis i o nfAg e n cy: Fire Rescue
Reviews Comments:
Based on plans dated 518115
1_ Streets that are less than 29' FCJFC shall have both sides marked "No Parking" per Albemarle
County Code-
2- Streets that are 29' FCJFC to 36' FCJFC shall be marked on one side "No Parking" per Albemarle
County Code_
I Expand the alley in Block 17 to allow for a wider fire access to lots 9 -15
4_ Need approved fire access to lots 16 -22 in block 17.
5_ Fire Flow test required before final approval.
Review status: I Requested Changes F-]
I
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: F57710 6120'15
Megan Yaniglos
From:
Victoria Fort <vfort @rivanna.org>
Sent:
Thursday, July 02, 2015 10:27 AM
To:
Megan Yaniglos
Cc:
Alex Morrison
Subject:
SDP201500028 Old Trail Blocks 10, 16, 17, 18 - Initial Site Plan
Megan,
According to the County Site Plan memo dated June 3, 2015, the County is currently reviewing the initial site plan for Old
Trail Blocks 10, 16, 17, and 18 (SDP201500028). Please note that as with all other development in the Crozet Area, these
blocks will require a flow acceptance letter from RWSA prior to final site plan approval.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Victoria
Victoria Fort, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
695 Moores Creek Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(P): (434) 977 -2970 ext. 205
(F): (434) 295 -1146
ACCREDITED LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Initial Site Plan
Lead Reviewer: Megan Yaniglos
Item Number: SDP201500028
Project Name: Old Trail Village Blocks 10, 16, 17, and 18
Due Date: July 6, 2015
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 should demonstrate uniformity to eliminate any
retinal light adaption conditions.
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.
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 territoriality and encourage
natural surveillance.
Pedestrian Scale Lighting
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 LED equipped dark sky compliant and
designed to minimize glare and light trespass.
L
MPO Steve Watson, ICPS, CPD
Albemarle County Police Department
Crime prevention Unit