Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200900065 Review Comments 2009-08-24Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District August 24, 2009 706 Forest St, Ste G Charlottesville, VA 22903 975 -0224 TO:Megan Yaniglos 013 06 6 6 Planning Department RE:Soils Report and Comments for: Old Trail — Block 2 and 3 r jE3:TJ/4if7C3 36C o1J tler R 2SB r,h 810 815 , 4 a 3 71)3 80 3 815 ' 4r380 BR k''`' „ l 1 PH (0 T1ii31l 1 C3,0 26,3 9& fir.'S8 1 i'.'76 1603 ' Y ` \ 661)E 3 s t G 17ca V 3`0 0 ,2603 5B 90B p u\ x SB 371)3 25B 5FB 25B 360 r_ -7 (PO 0 17 C,-W a 3 f--4'7B 0 26C3 e,.2683 25B 36C fl 0 25B 3 7B MQ 17 _ 1,c Iti 7 250 C B 2603 j u. S'96 3 j' 41) r'°.' r 968 6)t D, w 4-1, ,6G 26C_Q. 25E3 37D i25C a 7B J 3703 17 61)3 258 a 58 3E Y a 66E Sfgb Y j 258 fuur po 3bB 1 I.3 "25B 2603 258 v 376 6 25C 3 f 37_1) 7 s, dE.25B 16C 35t E 36p 7 45 y 2c 3 41) r ?37113 568 ,, 258 77 ).>.-----3703 9 36B, v'26C3,p n603 361)L Henley l S1 V 7Dc 3 Pt/. dmont Chu 5 hoo Pi w1)35B owr)sviile 7R 3773 7E3 3703 al Cr*, 77 H 3703 ri 35Bt / 81C 95 tk 3703 36B 1 7B S--- '368 v v 8 3 ` - '''3' Hi11 a r0 J C a Chur -h j 1'56 C ' 1 -j 3 i 1 Mils 78 3,8 i.6D t 3;C?.37x3 7b jp 4E 88 i V L Vj 36 LL C'360 3 7B B 4 j 3,B l 361)' 31 7B 4E J7 _. l 37n 16E0 7B 4E 4tj 3371)3 Bc sB 20 V Lu 360 o r D 164 ..NI"' r "41111i G 370 -C 41) . 37c 1 7e nr 55B 'iv'',1 371)O 33 1 Ii37037.68 79 3 0II7 GD1 3p3Cyeek4E76r 36C 1 7 3': '' 4E,44E B 7C3 30 /'660 USDA United States Natural Prepared by: Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Department of Resources Conservation DistrictAgricultureConservation434 - 975 -0224 Service Soils Report SOILS REPORT FOR: Old Trail, Blocks 2,3 Soil Survey Area: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Unit: 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Braddock is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 2e. The Virginia soil management group is 0. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 7C Braddock loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Braddock is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 3e. The Virginia soil management group is 0. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 25B Dyke silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Dyke is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is silt loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 2e. The Virginia soil management group is 0. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 25C Dyke silt loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Dyke is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is silt loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 3e. The Virginia soil management group is 0. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 26C3 Dyke clay loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes, severely eroded Description Category: Virginia FOTG Dyke is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil Thomas Jefferson SWCD 1 8/24/09 is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 4e. The Virginia soil management group is 0. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hayesville is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 4e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hayesville is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 6e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 37D3 Hayesville clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hayesville is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 6e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Dwellings With Basements - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited percent slopes 7C Braddock loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes 25B Dyke silt loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited percent slopes 25C Dyke silt loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes 26C3 Dyke clay loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes, severely eroded 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 Very limited percent slopes 37D3 Hayesville clay loam, 15 Very limited to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Thomas Jefferson SWCD 2 8/24/09 Septic Tank Absorption Fields - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited percent slopes 7C Braddock loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes 25B Dyke silt loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited percent slopes 25C Dyke silt loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes 26C3 Dyke clay loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes, severely eroded 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited percent slopes 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 Very limited percent slopes 37D3 Hayesville clay loam, 15 Very limited to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Mapunit Hydric Rating Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric percent slopes 7C Braddock loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 25B Dyke silt loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric percent slopes 25C Dyke silt loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 26C3 Dyke clay loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes, severely eroded 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 Not hydric percent slopes 37D3 Hayesville clay loam, 15 Not hydric to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Thomas Jefferson SWCD 3 8/24/09 Soil Shrink -Swell - Dominant Soil Top Depth : 0 Bottom Depth : 0 Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 1.5 percent slopes 7C Braddock loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 25B Dyke silt loam, 2 to 7 1.5 percent slopes 25C Dyke silt loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 26C3 Dyke clay loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes, severely eroded 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 1.5 percent slopes 37D3 Hayesville clay loam, 15 1.5 to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Corrosion Concrete - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Moderate percent slopes 7C Braddock loam, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes 25B Dyke silt loam, 2 to 7 Moderate percent slopes 25C Dyke silt loam, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes 26C3 Dyke clay loam, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes, severely eroded 36C Hayesville loam, 7 to 15 Moderate percent slopes 36D Hayesville loam, 15 to 25 Moderate percent slopes 37D3 Hayesville clay loam, 15 Moderate to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded Thomas Jefferson SWCD 4 8/24/09 Thomas Jefferson SWCD 5 8/24/09 OFALj O mow. Lx— COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 September 1, 2009 Mr. Scott Collins Collins Engineering 800 East Jefferson Street Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 RE: SDP - 2009 - 065 - Old Trail Village Block 3 Preliminary Site Plan Mr. Collins: The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Preliminary comments for the following divisions of the Department of Community Development and other agencies, as applicable, are attached: Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Engineer) Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner) Albemarle County Division of Planning (E91 1) Albemarle County Division of Zoning Inspections Albemarle County Division of Planning (Architectural Review Board) Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue Albemarle County Service Authority Virginia Department of Transportation Comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed, and should not be considered final. However, the Site Review Committee has attempted to identify all issues that could affect approval of the proposed project. Please make the revisions that have been identified as necessary for preliminary approval by the Site Review Committee. If you choose not to make the requested revisions, please submit in writing justification for not incorporating such revisions. Submit eight (8) full size copies and one (1 11" x 17" copy to the Department of Community Development including responses to each of the attached comments of the Site Review Committee by September 14 2009. Failure to submit this information by this date will result in suspension of the review schedule. Review will resume when revisions are submitted along with a reinstatement fee of $65. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Megan Yaniglos Senior Planner Zoning & Current Development J County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Scott Collins (scott @collins - engineering.com) March Mountain Properties LLC (justin @beightsdevelopment.com) From: Megan Yaniglos- Senior Planner Division: Zoning & Current Development Date:September 1, 2009 Subject: SDP -2009 -065- Old Trail Block 3- Preliminary Site Plan The Planner for the Zoning & Current Development 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.] 1. 32.5.6 (a)] Provide the magisterial district and the county and state on the title sheet. 2. 32.5.6 (b): 4.12.6] Provide more information for the parking calculations. Explain the type of units for the townhouses (1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, square feet ?). Also, break out how many guest spaces are required. 3. 32.5.6 (c)] Show the phase lines and proposed timing of development for the area labeled as `future development'. 4. 32.5.6 (i)] Coordinate street names with SUB2009 -108. Andy Slack made a comment for the subdivision concerning Marlbeck and Brookley Drives. 5. 32.5.6 (n)] Provide the dimensions for the walkways. 6. Code of Development- Table 6: Zoning Regulations] Provide the lot sizes for the townhouses in square feet. The minimum lot size for Block 3 is 3000 sf. is `LA' the land area in acres? If so, the almost all the lots are too small and need to meet the requirement according to the Code of Development. The smallest a lot can be is .069 acres. 7. Code of Development- Old Trail Center Zone CT5] The townhouses must face a public street where they are adjacent to a public street (townhouses 15 -25). Where there are internal townhouses in a block, they must face a grass mall (townhouses 8 -14). Revise to meet these requirements. Please contact Megan Yaniglos at the Department of Community Development 296 -5832 ext. 3004 for further information. 1 A - CrZems 1lINlP County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Megan Yaniglos, Senior Planner From: Amy Pflaum, Engineering Review Division: Current Development Date:August 31, 2009 Subject: SDP200900065 Old Trail Village Block 3 - Preliminary Site Plan The preliminary site plan for Old Trail Village Block 3, submitted on August 10, 2009, has been reviewed. Current Development Engineering has the following comments: Preliminary Site Plan Comments 1. Alleys will have a right -of -way or easement width of not less than 20 feet. [14 -410D] 2. Alley surface must be paved to VDOT standards, with a width of at least 12 feet, with the gravel base extended at least 1 foot beyond the edges to either side. [DM] 3. Alleys must intersect streets at two locations. Dead -end alleys with turnarounds may be permitted by waiver from the county engineer. [DM] 4. If driveways are designated parking spaces, dimensions must be 9x18x24' or 1Ox18x20'. [18- 4.12.16] 5. The angle of intersection of streets and alleys will be not less than eighty (80) degrees; however, a perpendicular intersection, where practical, is preferred. [14 -410B] 6. If it does not already exist, please provide a direct pedestrian link between the proposed townhouses and the Village Center (Block 1). Concrete sidewalk should be constructed along Old Trail Drive between Claremont Lane and Brookley Drive. [18- 32.7.2.8] 7. Capture site drainage before spilling into public right -of -way. Install inlets at entrances onto Claremont Lane. 8. Impervious area calculation on Sheet 4 does not appear to be correct. It appears that the areas of streets and alleys were not included in the calculation. 9. Please submit information on Upper Ballard Pond and the storm sewer pipes to it showing that this Block with this proposed impervious area was accounted for in the design. Application #:SDP200900065 Short Review Cornn .nts Project Name: Old Trail Village Block 3 (Phase B) - Prelim.Preliminary - Residential Date Completed:08/24/2009 Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: ENO OBJECTION. j I Date Completed:08/26/2009 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: It appears that at least a portion of this develoment may be visible from the Route 250 Entrance Corridor. The applicant is encouraged to submit site sections to clarify the extent of visibility. ARB review /approval will be required for visible portions of the development. ARB applications, checklists, guidelines and schedule are available on line at www.albemarle.org. Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY OFFICE 701 VDOT WAY CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911 DAVID S. EKERN, P.E. COMMISSIONER September l 2009 Mr. Glenn Brooks Department of Engineering and Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Subject: Site Review Meeting Comments September 3 2009 site review meeting Dear Mr. Brooks: Below are VDOT' s comments on the Site Plans for the September 3 2009 Site Review Committee Meeting: SDP - 2009 -00062 Free Bridge Offices-Prelim Site Plan (Elizabeth Marotta) A basin is being removed from this site in order to construct the new parking lot. If it is a temporary silt basin, there are no concerns, but if it a permanent stormwater management basin, there is cause for concern due to an increase in peak discharges going into the storm system under Olympia Drive. SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3 (Phase B)- Prelim. (Megan Yaniglos) Claremont Lane has a 20 mph design speed and the corresponding site distance is 225'. The connections to Claremont do not have adequate site distances shown. Sight distance triangles need to be contained within easements. The sight lines shown appear to cross structures or be very close to structures. In accordance with VDOT's Road Design Manual, Appendix B, page B -15, intersections entering from the same side of the major street should have a spacing of 500 feet but with lower traffic volumes can be spaced at 250 feet. The 14 foot private road easement does not meet the minimum criteria. The proposed grading of the private roads appears to drain water to the proposed public road. In accordance with 24 VAC 30 -71 -90 The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways, the water should not drain into the public road. There is a clear zone easement along Old Trail Dr. that needs to be shown on the plan. WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING SUB- 2009 -00108 Old Trail Village Block 2 Subdivision (Megan Yaniglos) The vacation of the right of way for the proposed public streets will remove these streets from qualifying for addition to the State Secondary Road System. In addition, this removal may result in other connecting streets not qualifying for state maintenance. Please request the applicants provide a written description of revisions with re- submissions. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me prior to sharing these comments with the applicants. Sincerely, Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer VDOT Charlottesville Residency 434 -293 -0011 WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING kluenizim Service Authtrity TO: Megan Yaniglos FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer DATE: August 28, 2009 RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: Old Trail Village Block 3 SDP200900065 TM 55 -1 -E1 The below checked items apply to this site. X 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for: X A. Water and sewer B. Water only C. Water only to existing structure D. Limited service X 2. A 12 inch water line is located on site. 3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is Gpm + at 20 psi residual. X 4. An 8 inch sewer line is located on site. 5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed. X 6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future easements. 7.and plans are currently under review. 8.and plans have been received and approved. 9. No plans are required. X 10. Final water and sewer plans are required for our review and approval prior to granting tentative approval. 11. Final site plan may /may not be signed. 12. RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections. 13. City of Charlottesville approval for sewer. Comments: Show water meter locations and sewer stub outs. The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows: meter locations water line size waterline locations sewer line size sewer line locations expected wastewater flows easements expected water demands 168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 - Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698 www.serviceauthoriy.org 41M - 7,. a I IRV IRG[^,P County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Scott Collins (scoff @collins - engineering.com) March Mountain Properties LLC (justin@beightsdevelopment.com) From: Megan Yaniglos- Senior Planner Division: Zoning & Current Development Date:September 1, 2009 Subject: SDP - 2009 -065- Old Trail Block 3- Preliminary Site Plan The Planner for the Zoning & Current Development 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.] X . [32.5.6 (a)] Provide the magisterial district and the county and state on the title sheet. 32.5.6 (b); 4.12.6] Provide more information for the parking calculations. Explain the type of units for the townhouses (1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, square feet ?). Also, break out how many guest spaces are required. 32.5.6 (c)] Show the phase lines and proposed timing of development for the area labeled as `future development'. 32.5.6 (i)] Coordinate street names with SUB2009 -108. Andy Slack made a comment for the subdivision concerning Marlbeck and Brookley Drives. 32.5.6 (n)] Provide the dimensions for the walkways. CO [Code of Development- Table 6: Zoning Regulations] Provide the lot sizes for the townhouses in square feet. The minimum lot size for Block 3 is 3000 sf. Is `LA' the land area in acres? If so, the almost all the lots are too small and need to meet the requirement according to the Code of Development. The smallest a lot can be is .069 acres. Code of Development- Old Trail Center Zone CT5] The townhouses must face a public street where they are adjacent to a public street (townhouses 15 -25). Where there are internal townhouses in a block, they must face a grass mall (townhouses 8 -14). Revise to meet these requirements. Please contact Megan Yaniglos at the Department of Community Development 296 -5832 ext. 3004 for further information. 1 Application #: I SDP200900065 Short Review Comrlrrants Project Name: Old Trail Village Block 3 (Phase B) - Prelim.Preliminary - Residential Date Completed:08/24/2009 Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: NO OBJECTION. Date Completed:09/03/2009 Reviewer:Claudette Grant Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: 1) The Code of Development describes mixed -use blocks with rowhouses fronting on a public street and /or fronting on a grass mall. This plan shows some rowhouses /town houses with rear yards to the public street or alley. This plan needs to be corrected to show rowhouses fronting on the public street or on a grass mall. 2) The Code of Development (COD) also describes blocks 1 - 7 comprising of shops, restaurants and professional offices providing a range of services and employment opportunities for residents. The COD also describes multi - family residential development intermixing with non - residential uses. Sheet 1 of 6 on the submitted plan includes a table described "code of development regulations ". This table describes block 3 as a mixed use block. Although an athletic facility for recreational purposes for residents is located in block 3, thus far, the only other use in this block is the proposed townhouses. Staff does not believe that the intent of mixed uses for this block, as described in the COD, is being shown with this submittal. However, there are undeveloped areas within block 3. The applicant will need to show a mix of uses similar to what is described in the COD for future developments of block 3 in order to allow the mixed use regulations for this block that is described in tables 5 & 6 in the COD. Date Completed:09/22/2009 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski ARB Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: On September 21, 2009, it was the consensus of the ARB that given the distance from the Entrance Corridor to the Old Trail Block 3 development, and the fact that the Block 1 buildings stand between I Block 3 and the Entrance Corridor, visibility of the proposed development is expected to be limited to such an extent that ARB review will not be required for the Block 3 buildings. Date Completed:08/26/2009 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: It appears that at least a portion of this develoment may be visible from the Route 250 Entrance Corridor. The applicant is encouraged to submit site sections to clarify the extent of visibility. ARB review /approval will be required for visible portions of the development. ARB applications, checklists, guidelines and schedule are available on line at www.albemarle.org. Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Thursday, September 24, 2009 FW: SDP -2009 -00065 Old Tray' Village Block 3- prelim Page 1 of 3 Megan Yaniglos From:DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. [ Joel .DeNunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent:Tuesday, October 27, 2009 10:00 AM To:Megan Yaniglos; Scott Collins; kirsten @collins - engineering.com Subject:RE: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim Attachments: 3- PLAN -BLOCK SHT 3.pdf Megan, I can recommend preliminary approval for the attached layout that Kirsten e- mailed me on October 22, 2009. Thanks Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434 - 293 -0011 Ext. 120 joel.denunzio @vdot.virginia.gov From: Megan Yaniglos [mailto:myaniglos @albemarle.org] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:43 AM To: Scott Collins; DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E.; kirsten @collins - engineering.com Subject: RE: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim Scott and Kirsten: You will need to adjust the phase line to include the turn around and the entrance, that is in Phase C, to be included with Phase B. Joel: I take it from this email that you now approve the preliminary for this site plan? Thanks. megan yaniglos senior planner Albemarle County Community Development Department Division of Zoning and Current Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3004 fax: 434.972.4126 From: Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins - engineering.com] Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 3:07 PM To: Joel.Denunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov; kirsten @collins - engineering.com Cc: Megan Yaniglos Subject: Re: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim Those units just have concrete stoops. The easement will ensure that they do not build a porch. 10/29/2009 FW: SDP -2009 -00065 Old Tr-;1 Village Block 3- prelim Page 2 of 3 Thanks Joel! Scott From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. < JoeI .DeNunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov> To: Kirsten Munz Cc: Scott Collins; Megan Yaniglos <myaniglos @albemarle.org> Sent: Fri Oct 23 11:58:31 2009 Subject: RE: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim Kirsten, This looks good. The only question I have is if the buildings on lots 22, 23, and 24 will be facing the road and have an entrance porch or staircase that will be out in the sight line or sight easement? Thanks JoeI JoeI DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434 - 293 -0011 Ext. 120 joel.denunzio @vdot.virginia.gov From: Kirsten Munz [mailto:kirsten @collins- engineering.com] Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 1:44 PM To: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. Cc: Scott Collins; Megan Yaniglos Subject: RE: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim Joel, Thanks for forwarding these comments. Per your conversation with Scott this morning, we have made the following revisions to the plan to address your comments: 1. We have eliminated the northwestern alley entrance & created a private shared driveway to serve lots 1 & 2. 2. Sight lines at the alley intersection with Claremont Lane have been updated to follow the VDOT guidelines. Sight distance easements are now shown as well. The buildings on lots 22, 23 and 24 have been slightly shifted to ensure there is no conflict with these easements. 3. The alley section will be corrected to remove the crown. Drainage structures will be designed in detail during the final site plan phase to demonstrate adequate drainage. Sheet 3 from the preliminary site plan is attached for your reference. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please let us know. Thank you. Kirsten Munz, P.E., A.I.C.P. COLLINS ENGINEERING, LLC 800 East Jefferson Street, Suite 300 Charlottesville, VA 22902 phone: (434)566 -3013 fax: (434)293 -3719 kirsten @collins- engineering.com From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. 10/29/2009 FW: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trai' Village Block 3- prelim Page 3 of 3 Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:33 PM To: 'Megan Yaniglos' Cc: Amy Pflaum Subject: SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim SDP - 2009 -00065 Old Trail Village Block 3- prelim Megan, I have reviewed the above preliminary site plan and have the following comments: Making the alley a right in right out is an ineffective treatment because it does not physically restrict the turning movements that have inadequate sight lines and therefore will probably be a safety issue if constructed this way. An entrance along this section of road without a large sight easement will not be possible and needs to be removed from the plan. The sight lines for the connection within phase C is improperly drawn. The proper line will be in conflict with the houses on lots 22, 23, and 24. Also, sight lines should only be terminated at an intersection when the intersection has a stop condition. The alley typical section is crowned in the center of the alleys but the DI is shown in the middle. The proposed DI does not appear to drain the runoff because of its location. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434 - 293 -0011 Ext. 120 ioei.denunzio vdot.virainia.gov 10/29/2009 toe ALLE County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Megan Yaniglos, Senior Planner From:Amy Pflaum, Engineering Review Division: Current Development Date:August 31, 2009 Subject: SDP200900065 Old Trail Village Block 3 - Preliminary Site Plan The preliminary site plan for Old Trail Village Block 3, submitted on August 10, 2009, has been reviewed. Current Development Engineering has the following comments: Preliminary Site Plan Comments 1. Alleys will have a right -of -way or easement width of not less than 20 feet. [14 -410D] 2. Alley surface must be paved to VDOT standards, with a width of at least 12 feet, with the gravel -- base extended at least 1 foot beyond the edges to either side. [DM] 3. Alleys must intersect streets at two locations. Dead -end alleys with turnarounds may be peimitted by waiver from the county engineer. [DM] Ar 4. If driveways are designated parkipg aces, dimensions must be 9x18x24' or 1 Ox18x20'. [18- 4.12.16] t.: l.. `i, tr C"1 5. The angle of intersection of streets and alleys will be not less than eighty (80) degrees; however, a perpendicular intersection, where practical, is preferred. [14 -410B] 6. If it does not already exist, please provide a direct pedestrian link between the proposed townhouses and the Village Center (Block 1). Concrete sidewalk should be constructed along Old Trail Drive between Claremont Lane and Brookley Drive. [18- 32.7.2.8]c)h - ,I14 7. Capture site drainage before spilling into public right -of -way. Install inlets at entrances onto Claremont Lane. 8. Impervious area calculation on Sheet 4 does not appear to be correct. It appears that the areas of streets and alleys were not included in the calculation. 9. Please submit information on Upper Ballard Pond and the storm sewer pipes to it showing that this Block with this proposed impervious area was accounted for in the design. ti.tt)/ t a t rte-Wiz• l ,z z_a r_ C • 5 4 , L . L'4i4 ALof I F i lljjyyry mG1 ii r County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Megan Yaniglos, Senior Planner From:Amy Pflaum, Engineering Review Division: Current Development Date:August 31, 2009 REV #1: October 13, 2009 Subject: SDP200900065 Old Trail Village Block 3 - Preliminary Site Plan The preliminary site plan for Old Trail Village Block 3, revised and submitted on September 14, 2009, has been reviewed. Current Development Engineering comments have been addressed. Preliminary Site Plan Comments REV #1: Comment has been addressed. REV #1: Comment has been addressed. REV #1: Comment has been addressed with the addition of turnarounds and connections. These new features are proposed in the adjacent parcel, Phase C, which is under different ownership than Phase B. Evidence of temporary construction and permanent access easements will be required prior to the approval of a final site plan. REV #1: Parking requirements are met via garages and on street spaces, driveways are not required to meet parking space dimensions. REV #1: Comment has been addressed. REV #1: Comment has been addressed. The sidewalk will be constructed adjacent to Old Trail Drive between Claremont Lane and Brookley Drive with this project. REV #1: Comment has been addressed. REV #1: Comment has been addressed, calculation has been revised to include alleys, streets are accounted for in previously approved Block 3 stormwater management plan WPO200800014). REV #1: The approved Block 3 stormwater management plan (WPO200800014) predicts this area (Phase B & C) to have a C value of 0.70 for 2.41 acres. Phase B is 1.195 acres at approximately 0.80, therefore, the future development of Phase C (1.215 acres) may have a C value not to exceed 0.60.