Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201800187 Review Comments Easement Plat 2018-11-14k' 01Y AL vit�r�A County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434-296-5832 Memorandum To: Kris Winters (KWINTERSkROUDABUSH.COM) From: Cameron Langille, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: October 24, 2018 First Revision: November 14, 2018 Subject: SUB201800187 Brookhill Easement Plat Fax 434-972-4126 The County of Albemarle Planning Division will grant or recommend approval of the plat referenced above once the following comments have been addressed: [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] [14-302 (A)(15), 14-303 (B)(6)] The plat proposes numerous easements on TMP 46-18C. Please add the owner addresses and name to Sheet V 1 as a statement of title as done with the other lots. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 2. [14-303 (A)] Please add a statement to consent of division for the platting of easements on TMP 46-18C on Sheet V 1. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The written text under the Statement of Consent to Division omits reference to TMP 46-18C, please revise. 3. [14-303 (0)] Please add a signature panel for the owners of TMP 46-18C on Sheet V 1. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 4. [14-302 (B)(5)] Please add a note to Sheet V1 stating all applicable zoning and overlay districts that apply to TMP 46-18C. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 5. [14-302 (A)(15),14-303 (B)(6)] Once the other Brookhill BLA plat is recorded, please revise the statement of titles on Sheet V 1 so that the instrument deed book and page number is included for each affected parcel. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 6. [14-302 (B)(5)] Please revise Note 6 on Sheet V1 to state "Existing TMP 46-19B1 is zoned..." Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 7. [14-302 (A)(4)] On all applicable drawings, please show the location of the existing private easement recorded in deed book 459, pages 3-4. The easement should be labeled as public or private and should state the instrument number. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 8. [14-302 (A)(15)] Please state the names and addresses of the easement holders for the existing 50' easement recorded in deed book 459, pages 3-4. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 9. [14-302 (B)(1)] Please add a date of last revision to each sheet. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed, please add an updated revisions date based on the required changes from this review letter. 10. [14-302 A)(11)] On all applicable drawings, please revise the parcel labels so that they include the recorded instrument deed book and page number for all of the parcels once the other Brookhill boundary line adjustment plat has been approved and recorded. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The parcel labels for TMP 46-18 and 46-18A should state DB 4997 PG. 724 as the most recent recorded instrument. Please update all applicable drawings that have a label for these parcels. 11. [14-302 (A)(14)] On all applicable drawings, please revise the callout for the Stella Lane and Archer Avenue reserved right of way that is being recorded with the other Brookhill BLA plat. It should note state the recorded instrument deed book and page number. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 12. [14-302 (A)(14)] Please revise Note 11 on Sheet 1. This plat proposes to reserve land for future dedication to public use upon demand by the County for necessary street right of ways associated with the Polo Grounds Road widening. State which parcels contain portions of the proposed land reservation and state the purpose of the reservation (e.g. to accommodate Polo Grounds Road widening per ZMA201500007 proffers). Rev 1: Comment not fully addressed. The callouts shown on the plats use different language than Note 11. Both the note and the callouts should state "Land hereby Reserved For Future Dedication To Public Use Upon Demand By The County." Please revise Note 11 on Sheet Vl, and the callouts on all applicable drawings. a. Note 11 should note state anything about reservation of land for Stella Lane and Archer Avenue since that will already be recorded per the other Brookhill BLA plat. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 13. [14-302 (A)(14)] The plat is proposing to reserve land along Polo Grounds Road across multiple parcels. Please address the following: a. On Sheet V1, state the acreage of reserved land proposed within each TMP as a note. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Sheet Vl states that 0.034 acres of TMP 16-19B4 is being reserved for right of way widening. The label on Sheet V9 for this reservation does not include leaders, and it appears that much more acreage than 0.034 acres is being reserved. Please add leaders to Sheet V9 for this label, and ensure that the proposed future right of way boundary is clearly identifiable. b. On Sheets V3 through V9, revise the labels for the land reservation as follows "xxx acres of TMP xxx hereby reserved for dedication to public use upon demand by the County." Perhaps shading in the land being reserved will make the easement boundaries and reserved land boundaries easier to read as well. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Sheet Vl states that 0.034 acres of TMP 16-19B4 is being reserved for right of way widening. The label on Sheet V9 for this reservation does not include leaders, and it appears that much more acreage than 0.034 acres is being reserved. Please add leaders to Sheet V9 for this label, and ensure that the proposed future right of way boundary is clearly identifiable. 14. [14-303 (A)] Please revise the statement to consent of division for TMP 46-18A and 46-18 on Sheet V1. The plat proposes to reserve right of way along Polo Grounds Road within both parcels. The statement to consent should state "... and the reservation of land for future dedication to public use upon demand by the County..." Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 15. [14-303 (A)] Please revise the statement to consent of division for TMPs 46-19A, 46-19131, 46-19133, and 46-19134. The statement should state "... and the reservation of land for future dedication to public use upon demand by the County..." Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 16. [14-303 (D)] Please state the acreage of all existing parcels in their labels on all applicable drawings once the other Brookhill BLA plat is recorded. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. The acreages are not stated in the Darcel labels on Sheet V2. The acreage of TMP 46-18A is incorrect on Sheet V5, it should state "28.681 acres." 17. [14-302 (13)(9)] Please show the limits of the flood hazard overlay district on all applicable parcels and all applicable sheets. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 18. [14-302 (A)(4) and 14-302(A)(5)] The plat proposes several types of easements that are not identified as either public or private. The labels for these easements should be revised to state "public" or "private." This comment applies to the following types of easements: a. "Variable Width Maintenance Easement" on Sheet V3. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. "Variable Width Storm Easement" On Sheet V3, V4, V5, V6, V7, V8, V9, V 11, V 12. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Public or private is missing for label on Sheet V3. c. "Conservation Easement" on Sheet V3, V5, and V18. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d. "Variable Conservation Easement" on Sheet V 16. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. e. "Variable SWM Easement" on Sheets V 10, V 12, V 16. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. f. "Variable Width SWM Easement" on Sheet V5. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Public or private is missing for label on Sheet V5. g. "25' SWM Easement" on Sheets V 15, V 16. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. h. "25' SWM Access Easement" on Sheets V 10, V 11. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. i. "25' Storm Drain Easement" on Sheet VI 1. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. j. "SWM Access and Maintenance Easement" on Sheet V14 and V16. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 19. [General Comment] All proposed easements with variable widths need to include the word "Width" in the label. As seen in the previous comment, numerous easements omit the word "Width" and just state "Variable." Rev. 1: Comment addressed. a. Sheet V 10 —Variable SWM Easement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Sheet V 12 — Variable SWM Easement, Variable Storm Drain Easement. Rev. 1: Comment fiddregge[l_ c. Sheet V 13 — Variable ACSA Utilities Easements, Variable ACSA Water Easements. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d. Sheet V 14 — Variable ACSA Water Easements. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. e. Sheet V15 — Variable ACSA Water Easements. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. f. Sheet V16 — Variable ACSA Water Easement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 20. [General Comment] The names of some easements are confusing and do not clearly explain their purpose. Please either revise the names of the following easements, or provide notes explaining what purpose they serve: Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See Engineering comment #1 for revisions to the easement names. This affects multiple sheets and different easements, including some of those mentioned below. Once Engineering is satisfied with the naming nomenclature of the easements, all Planning sub -comments on this comment will be addressed. a. Sheets V3, V4, V5, V6, V7, V8, V9, VI — Variable Width Storm Easement. Is this supposed to be a storm drainage easement? b. Sheet V3 — Variable Width Maintenance Easement. What kind of maintenance easement is this? c. Sheet V5, V 10, V 12, VI 6 — Variable Width SWM Easement. Is this supposed to be a stormwater management easement, a stormwater facility easement, etc.? d. Sheets V 15, V 16 — 25' SWM Easement. Is this supposed to be a stormwater management easement, a stormwater facility easement, a stormwater access easement, etc.? e. Sheet V3, V 16, V 18 — Variable Conservation Easement and Conservation Easement. Is this supposed to be easements over top of the open space required in Block 4? If so, it should be re- named to "Private Open Space Easement." See comment #28 for additional details. 21. [14-302 (A)(5)] Please list the deed book and page number for all existing ACSA easements. Revise Sheet V9 and any other applicable drawing where existing ACSA easements are visible. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 22. [General Comment] Sheet VI I appears to show the 25' SWM Access Easement crossing into the land reserved for Stella Lane. Is this a mistake? Shouldn't the easement end at the reserved ROW line and not cross into the reserved ROW? Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 23. [General Comment] The plats show solid black circles for what appears to be existing property corners. The plats also show hollow circles along some of the proposed easement boundaries. Please add a legend explaining what each circle type represents. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 24. [14-303 (E) and (IT) and 14-4211 Some of the proposed easements do not clearly label the control points or monuments for where line and curve line segments begin and end. Per the previous comment, if the hollow circles are intended to identify where linear and cure lines end along proposed easements, they should be shown at the termination points of along all line segments of all proposed easements. Most proposed easements after Sheet V5 do not show the hollow circle at the line termination points. In particular, this applies to the following: a. Curve lines C1, C2, C4, and C5 on Sheet V3. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Curve line C7 on Sheet V4. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. c. Measurements for distances between the three control points along the land reservation boundaries at bottom right corner of Sheet V5 and top left corner of Sheet V6. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d. Curve line C12 on Sheet V8. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. e. Curve line C 16 on Sheet V 10 and V 11. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. f. All sides of the proposed SWM Access and Maintenance Easement on Sheets V 14 and V 16. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. g. The sides of the Variable Conservation Easement on Sheet V 16. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 25. [14-303 (C)] The 350.13' property boundary line visible on Sheet V17 is missing bearings, degrees and minutes. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 26. [General Comment] The plat does not show any easements associated with the 100' Route 29 landscape buffer on TMPs 46-19B 1, 46-19B3, and 46-19134. As previously discussed, a private 100' landscape buffer should be shown on the plats. a. Add a note to Sheet VI stating that the 100' Route 29 landscape buffer is to be owned and maintained by the Brookhill Homeowners Association in accordance with the requirements of the ZMA201500007 Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Please submit a deed of declaration for maintenance and ownership of landscape buffer easements that explains that they will be owned and maintained by the Brookhill HOA in accordance with the ZMA201500007 Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Draft of the deed has not yet been submitted to the County for review and approval. c. Please see the attached Checklist for Maintenance Agreements for further details explaining language requirements in the deed for the landscape buffer easement. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Draft of the deed has not vet been submitted to the County for review and approval. 27. [General Comment] The plat does not show any easements for the 30' Polo Grounds Road buffer on TMP 46-19A. As previously discussed, a private 30' landscape buffer easement should be shown on the plats. 4 a. Add a note to Sheet VI stating that the 30' Polo Grounds Road landscape buffer is to be owned and maintained by the Brookhill Homeowners Association in accordance with the requirements of the ZMA201500007 Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Please submit a deed of declaration for maintenance and ownership of landscape buffer easements that explains that they will be owned and maintained by the Brookhill HOA in accordance with the ZMA201500007 Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Draft of the deed has not vet been submitted to the County for review and approval. c. Please see the attached Checklist for Maintenance Agreements for further details explaining language requirements in the deed for the landscape buffer easement. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Draft of the deed has not vet been submitted to the County for review and approval. 28. [14-317, ZMA201500007 and Section 18-4.71 The Brookhill Block 4 final site plan proposes a total of 1.28 acres of open space between Block 4A (0.55 acres) and Block 4B (.073 acres). The Zoning Ordinance requires that a legal instrument ensuring the maintenance and preservation of the open space that is approved by the agent and the county attorney in conjunction with the approval of the subdivision plat or site plan. Please submit a deed of declaration for maintenance and ownership of open space easements that explains that the open space areas will be owned and maintained by the Brookhill HOA in accordance with the ZMA201500007 Code of Development. a. All proposed open space areas should be shown and labeled within an Open Space Easement on the applicable drawings. State the acreage of the open space easement in the label. b. A note should be added to Sheet V 1 stating that the open space easements will be owned by the Brookhill HOA and maintenance of the open space will be in compliance with the ZMA201500007 Code of Development. c. Please see the attached Checklist for Maintenance Agreements for further details explaining language requirements in the deed for the open space. Rev 1: Planning staff requests a discussion with the applicant regarding open space requirements in Block 4. Please contact Cameron Langille in the Planning Division by using blan ig lle(c-r�,albemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext.3432 for further information. Comments from Other Reviewers: Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — Emily Cox, ecoxggalbemarle.org — Requested changes, see attached. Albemarle County Service Authority — Richard Nelson, melsonnserviceauthroity.org — ACSA review still underway. Any comments or approvals will be forwarded to the applicant upon receipt. Virginia Department of Transportation — Adam Moore, adam.moorekvdot.vir ing ia.gov No Objection, see attached. County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Cameron Langille From: Emily Cox Date: 24 Oct 2018 Rev. 1 Date: 13 Nov 2018 Subject: Brookhill Easement Plat (SUB201800187) The Brookhill easement plat has been reviewed by Engineering. The following comments will need to be addressed before approval: 1. Naming of easements should be consistent. Stormwater management facilities should be SWM facility easement, with a SWM definition on the cover page. Are easements for storm pipes labeled storm easement or storm drain easement? There appears to be both. They are typically, drainage easements. SWM access & maintenance easement can just be part of the SWM facility easement. Engineering suggests a meeting to review plat and naming conventions and compare with the site plan/WPO plan. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Engineering still suggests a meeting to review plat with site plan/WPO plan to discuss naming conventions. Here are some examples/direction: a. Sheet V3: The storm easement should be "public storm drain easement" and the level spreader and the conservation easement should be "SWM facility easement" b. Sheet V4: Provide leaders for the public storm drain easement in the middle of the sheet. c. Sheet V5& V16: The level spreader and conservation easement should be "SWM facility easement" d. Sheet V5: Provide leaders for SWM facility easement label. e. Sheet V5: Ensure all storm drain easements are labeled as public. There is one missing this label in the middle of the sheet. f. Sheet V8&9: Provide leaders for all easements. One is missing. g. Sheet V10 & V11: The 25' access easement should be "SWM facility easement" h. Sheet V14: The 25' access & maintenance easement should be "SWM facility easement" i. Sheet V15&16: The SWM access & maintenance easement should be "SWM facility easement" 2. Level spreaders and ditches to level spreaders should be in a SWM facility easement. Rev. 1: Conservation easements behind level spreaders should be SWM facility easements. 3. Easements will need associated deeds. Rev. 1:Comment still valid. 4. Call out arrows should be pointing towards lines, not general areas. Rev. 1: Comment Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 2 still valid. Ensure all labels have leaders going to lines. 5. Several call outs say variable, but not variable width? Please clarify. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 6. Professional seal should be signed and dated. Rev. 1: Comment still valid. Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Commissioner COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper, Virginia 22701 October 30, 2018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Cameron Langille Re: Brookhill Blocks 1-8— Easement PIat SUB-2018-00187 Review #1 Dear Mr. Langille: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plans as submitted by Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc., dated October 02, 2018, and find it to be generally accepatable. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. If further information is desired, please contact Willis C. Bedsaul at 434-422-9866. Sincerely, adoA, �� Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING