The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSUB201400161 Correspondence Final Plat 2015-09-19 Johnathan Newberry From: John Anderson Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 9:10 AM To: Bill Ledbetter; Dave Brockman Cc: Johnathan Newberry; Glenn Brooks Subject: WPO2015-00066, Old Trail Village, block 15 Amendment-VSMP Bill,Dave, (Johnathan,please see bold,below) Earlier this year,when I felt we were making progress on the Master Plan in June only to be surprised in July with novel approach to applicable technical criteria(resolved in August), I was struck by Old Trail's time/resource commitment to seeking a particular outcome. I ask for that now in relation to stormwater management design that must be thoughtful, compliant,and safe well into the future for residents,the public,public/private streets,environment, streams/buffers,HOA-maintained SWM facilities, and the community broadly. This past year,experience of working on Old Trail projects has left a mixed impression: near-constant rush to approve,yet months-long delay relating to Master Plan. I value working relationships with designers at RGA, Stantec,and OTV,yet my purpose is to identify requirements,compare design with standards,identify discrepancies,remedy my own mistakes, and approve design that meets standards. I hope to preserve relationships. If unable to convince that my role is necessary and not excessive, I hope at least to preserve relationships. I say this because it appears to me that a possible reaction to this note(or review comments when available)may be: "What are we supposed to do?" I do not have a ready answer. We have not reached agreement on a Master Plan,and cannot fall back on a Master Plan if SWM design for blocks 11, 14, 12 and 15 must rely on control in another area of Old Trail Village. The sediment basin now serving block 12,phase 1 has been in place for years. Sediment basins are not designed to be permanent structures. This basin's original design we now understand is insufficient to meet design criteria for geometry, volume,or construction of a permanent SWM facility. The riser and barrel are proposed to be replaced, a circumstance VSMH warns against(Spec. 3.06). Replacing barrel/riser requires opening embankment to depth of floor of basin,risking embankment integrity and at once removing runoff control during conversion to permanent SWM facility. Questions: What will happen to block 11, 14, 12, 15 post-developed runoff during conversion to permanent SWM facility? Will equipment have adequate access? Has an Earthen Embankment to retain permanent pool been properly considered? Is it possible to construct embankment(or modify existing sediment basin)to meet requirements of DEQ BMP Clearinghouse Appendix A, Earthen Embankments? What are the obstacles to conversion,or runoff control during conversion,or runoff control options during conversion? Design proposes 9VAC25-870-96,Table 1, Retention basin III(4 x WQV with aquatic bench)to control storm runoff from blocks 11, 14, 12, 15. Permanent pool depth>9 ft is proposed. Qio(short-duration) depth will approach 15 ft. The facility is in very close proximity to residential development. During special exception(to zoning)request to allow SWM facility replacement,a board member expressed concern with design, reflecting understanding that OTV homeowners are skeptical if not opposed to permanent pool facilities. This permanent pool facility is proposed to replace an approved bioretention design without permanent pool. Proposal includes grading to the very edge of Rowcross, close to Lot 23 (in fact,Final Plat New SWM Easement is shown crossing this Lot). Design proposes an emergency spillway that sweeps toward Old Trail Drive,the development's primary means of access. Riser/barrel structure are slated to be replaced. 41100 Final Plat, Road Plan, Site Plan, and VSMP plans are and were submitted with timing sequence that now proves problematic(see private/public street, below). The retention basin earthen embankment will be reviewed in detail. All applicable requirements in DEQ BMP Clearinghouse Appendix A, Earthen Embankment, should be considered,including: subsoil analysis/permeability tests; max. slopes;pool depth; materials; density/compaction(tests during construction required); cut-off trench; other. Please reference DEQ Appendix A Earthen Embankment, as review will reference it often. VDOT must review VSMP. County is sensitive to VDOT comments. VDOT reviews VSMP Applications to assess potential impact to VDOT facilities,or public RW. This design has potential to impact Rowcross Street(private RW), and Old Trail Drive(public). Although Rowcross private right-of-way was reviewed without objection by Engineering, SDP2015-00007,Old Trail Village Block 12 Phase 2—Final Site Plan is not approved. If grades shown with this WPO require revision to road plan, and they appear to, or if there is contention concerning general welfare or safety,then this may affect Final Site Plan Approval. Grading shown with WPO2015-00066 appears inconsistent with approved road plan grades. This is consequence of road plan coming in prior to and without a VSMP/WPO. Please accept and consider any VDOT/Engineering WPO comments relating to SWM facility design relating to safety or general welfare. This note suggests we avoid dispute centering on Rowcross St.private right-of-way. It may or may not be too late for Albemarle County to revisit designation of Rowcross Street as a private street(Private Street Authorization request submitted?),or to require Rowcross be public to intersection with Alley A. I would not write if I were not hopeful. County ordinance and state law insist on design that is safe, compliant, and effective. If retention basin III design cannot meet VSMH Spec. 3.06 design criteria—if, for example, size must be reduced—then pollutant loading reduction required may be met via on-site(this BMP; or overall demonstration of development-wide compliance via Master Plan [not yet complete])and off-site(Lickinghole Basin)credit. Terms of off- site credit are outlined in 21-Nov 2014 email guidance. 21-Nov 2014 guidance may require clarification,or discussion. From an Engineering perspective,there is no higher priority than safety and general welfare, including long-term, low- maintenance operation of a basin with pool>9 ft. The basin must be designed and built consistent with VSMH, 1999, Spec. 3.06. The earthen embankment must be designed and built consistent with DEQ BMP Clearinghouse Appendix A, Earthen Embankment. Please reference details in Spec. 3.06 and Appendix A, as comments are certain to reference these design documents. These statements are not review comments,but are intended to be helpful. I understand pressure to develop quickly,have in the past and will likely continue to adjust review schedule to support development needs. Engineering review, however,principally serves compliance, and this design is problematic. It represents revision to approved bioretention basin design (no permanent pool); it proposes depths deeper than recommended (see Spec. 3.06,2'-6'). Proposed design is the predicable consequence of limiting space to perimeter-only permanent SWM facilities. Lots are maximized with this design. Permanent pool depth is excessive. Design intrudes on stream buffers. The burden of the question "what are we to do?" lies with developer and designer,not Albemarle County. Design elements are critical. I am frustrated. It has come to this,and this is problematic. Approval depends on design, routing summaries,narrative, and sequence that ensure compliance. RGA and Old Trail Village are welcome to request meetings,though we ask to avoid expectation for immediate meetings. I explained Thu morning when I visited RGA office to discuss block 12,phase 2 Final Plat that I felt it may be two weeks before I comment on this WPO—a fair estimate. I spent time yesterday noting items of concern or importance. It would be misleading to promise quick approval of a proposal to replace the currently approved bio- retention basin with a 9VAC25-870-96 Table 1 retention basin III(4 x WQV with aquatic bench). Also,revised WPO plans cannot in this instance be reviewed as .PDFs,given level of detail and likely extent of revisions. I will speed review as much as possible,and truly,hope this note is helpful. Thank you John E.Anderson,PE I Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle,Virginia 2 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22 02 '04001 434.296.5832 ext.3069 3 441111110.' %%IS Johnathan Newberry From: Johnathan Newberry Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 10:55 AM To: Rebecca Ragsdale Cc: Megan Yaniglos Subject: FW: block 12, 15, Old Trail Thought you'd want to be in this loop too. From:John Anderson Sent:Tuesday,September 08, 2015 10:33 AM To: David Brockman<dave@oldtrailvillage.com>; Bill Ledbetter<BLedbetter@roudabush.com> Cc: Mark Hopkins<mhopkins@albemarle.org>; Geoff Elsie<gelsie@albemarle.org>; Glenn Brooks <GBROOK5@albemarle.org>;Johnathan Newberry<jnewberry@albemarle.org> Subject: block 12, 15, Old Trail Dave,Bill, I visited Old Trail Saturday, and spoke with Mark Hopkins and Geoff Elsie earlier this morning about grading activity in blocks 12 and 15. Pads have been prepared and are being developed(built upon)in block 12,phase 2. I will try to coordinate WPO/VSMP status with other staff in the future,but for the moment, development and construction of dwellings in block 12,phase 2 (Craig Builders)precedes SWM plan approval for this section. We are making progress on design,review, and approval of post-developed SWM control for block 12,phase 2, and block 15,phase 2. For the moment, however,there is no approved SWM plan for these block phases. I am writing to clarify that limits of disturbance and limits of development cannot exceed areas permitted under approved SWM plans. This means: Albemarle County expects no Applications for building permits for any lots in block 12,phase 2, or block 15,phase 2, prior to SWM plan approval and Final Plat approval of lots in these block phases. Also, we anticipate no grading beyond mass-grade contours shown on approved WPO201400071. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. John E.Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3069 1 '`d" Johnathan Newberry From: Alex Morrison [amorrison@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 9:56 AM To: Johnathan Newberry Subject: SUB201400161: Old Trail Village Block 15-Final JT, I have reviewed the plat and have no comments. I hereby recommend approval of SUB201400161. Alexander J. Morrison,EIT Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville,Virginia 22911 (0)434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (F)434-979-0698 Like the ACSA on Facebook at www.facebook.com/acsaconnect 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE of fAirr Department Community Development E Planning Services Division xa+ ,, ,; 401 McIntire Road North Wing• Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Phone:(434)296-5823 •Fax: (434)972-4035 Transmittal From: JT Newberry Date: 04/08/15 To: Andrew Slack- E911 0 OJeremy Lynn-ACSA 0 °John Anderson- Engineering 0 °Shelley Plaster-VDOT 0 ORobbie Gilmer-Fire and Rescue 0 JOB#/FILE NAME:SUB-2014-00161 Old Trail Village Block 15-Final We are sending you the following items: /1 Attached or ❑ Under separate cover ❑ Copy of Letter ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Plats ❑ Specifications ❑ Other #of Copies Date Description 1 4/2/15 Old Trail Village Block 15 -Final These are transmitted as checked below: ® For review and comments ®For approval ❑ Other Remarks: Bill Ledbetter prepared the original fmal plat(dated 9/25/2014) and David Jordan has prepared this latest revision. Some reviewers have already provided "no objection" on earlier versions, but I wanted to confirm your approval with this latest revision. Thanks. Comments are due in City View or email by: 4/24/15 Signature: JT Newberry PHONE(434)977-0205 FAX(434)296-5220 "'r" INFO@ROUDABUSH.COM ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC. LAND SURVEYING A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 914 MONTICELLO ROAD ENGNEERING LAND PLANNING CHARLOTTESVILLE,VIRGINIA 22902 J.THOMAS GALE.L.S. MARILYNN R.GALE,LS. WILLIAM J.LEDBETTER.LS EDWARD D.CAMPBELL III.L.S. C4.14.�Q_ y\ ' (/ 2 lo C) 15 Attn: Megan Yaniglos c; Senior Planner ` I �` Albemarle County yok LWC •,1 strfZS '—'4 Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road d kicks �� t/ r�� 44-4Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 �� &/D ( L4.(Dl Regarding: Old Trail Village Block 15 lj ZSI�.( W� Just aeI,+ Request for Private Street Authorization 'Ptak C i,, o.n `ILS, Request for Waiver of Street Standards IA* re N.A..w Dear Ms. Yaniglos: In accordance with Section 14-233 of the Albemarle County Code of Ordinances, we are requesting the authorization of a private street in Block 15 of Old Trail Village, using the Neighborhood model development [Section 14-233(A)(1)(iii)] as justification. The proposed private street, "Court Mont Way", would provide a streetscape that is more consistent with the neighborhood model because it will mirror the overall road design of the blocks surrounding it, specifically Blocks 11 and 14. The overall design of Block 15 will better achieve the density goals of the comprehensive plan with a private street than with a public street. Because we are eliminating the larger Right-of-Way, planting strip, and sidewalk requirements, more space will be available for housing and lots, which in turn, will allow for a development with a higher density. Through the use of a private street, rear vehicular access to the houses would be provided so that the buildings may face a common amenity (i.e. public street frontage for every lot). A significant environmental resource would not be protected with either a public or private street. Additionally, a private street would provide more space for additional parking for each lot in the subdivision. Houses will be able to have a total of 4 parking spaces (two for the house tenants in the garage and two guest spaces in the driveway). In accordance with Section 14-422(E)(1) and 14-422(F)(1), we are requesting a waiver for the requirement of sidewalks and planting strips along "Court Mont Way" in Block 15 of Old Trail Village. We feel that sidewalks and planting strips are not necessary along this private street due to the fact that "Court Mont Way" serves as a rear access to all of the lots in Block 15. Additionally, sidewalks and street trees are provided on the fronts of the units and along the public streets "Claremont Lane" and "Fielding Run Drive". Thank you for your consideration regarding this request, and as always, if I can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to ask. Best regards, Christopher, C. Mulligan Johnathan Newberry From: Jeremy Lynn [jlynn@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Friday, December 19, 2014 10:39 AM To: Johnathan Newberry Cc: Bill Ledbetter; Alex Morrison Subject: Old Trail Village J.T., The ACSA has approved the plans for Old Trail Village Block 12, Phase 1 and Old Trail Village Block 15. Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else from our office. Jeremy M. Lynn, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road, Charlottesville, VA 22911 (434) 977-4511 ext. 114 1 Nome Johnathan Newberry From: Ana Kilmer Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 2:36 PM To: Jeffrey S. Hall; Dave Brockman; 'Bill Ledbetter' Cc: Kenny Thacker; Mark Hopkins; John Anderson; Todd Shifflett; Esther Grace; Johnathan Newberry Subject: old trail village block 12 phase 1 and block 15 phase 1 performance bonds The following bonds have been posted and approved: Old Trail Village Block 12 Phase 1 Erosion Control and Stormwater Management Plan—WPO-2014-00071 Erosion and Sediment Control - $40,540 The Lickinghole fee and the permit and first year inspection fee have been paid Subdivision Plat, Old Trail Village Block 12 Lot A and Lot B Subdivision/Road Performance Bond - $87,780 Subdivision Plat, Old Trail Village Block 12 Lot A and Lot B Subdivision/Road Performance Bond -Water and Sewer- $58,200 Old Trail Village Block 15 Phase 1 Road and Utility Plan Subdivision/Road Performance Bond - $102,530 Old Trail Village Block 15 Phase 1 Road and Utility Plan —Water& Sewer Subdivision/Road Performance Bond - $101,000 Thanks Ana D. Kilmer Management Analyst County of Albemarle Community Development Department 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 434-296-5832 akilmer@albemarle.org Note: I will be out of the office 12/29/2014-1/2/2015. I will return 1/5/2015 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE of A Department Community Development � arii1 �'�?0_.�, Planning Services Division �� .'�;�,; 401 McIntire Road North Wing• Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Phone: (434)296-5823 •Fax: (434)972-4035 Transmittal From: JT Newberry Date: 11/13/14 To: John Anderson-Engineering 0 OAndrew Slack- E911 0 OTroy Austin-VDOT 0 OJeremy Lynn- ACSA 0 ORobbie Gilmer-Fire and Rescue 0 JOB#/FILE NAME:SUB-2014-00161 Old Trail Block 15 -Final We are sending you the following items: ® Attached or El Under separate cover El Copy of Letter El Prints ❑ Plans El Plats El Specifications ❑ Other # of Copies Date Description 1 9/25/14 Final Plat These are transmitted as checked below: ® For review and comments ® For approval El Other Remarks: I overlooked this file in my office and neglected to transmit it out in a timely manner. Anything you can do to expedite your review is much appreciated! Comments are due in City View or email by: 12/4/14 Signature: JT Newberry