The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSUB201800172 Action Letter 2018-11-16AL$�� IRG1 k COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 11-16-18 Scott Collins 200 Garrett Street, Suite K. Charlottesville VA 22902 SUB201800172 Spring Hill Village — Preliminary Subdivision Plat Mr. Collins, The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative approval to the above referenced preliminary subdivision plat. 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 plat for all or a portion of the site within one (1) year after the date of this letter as provided in the Section 14-226 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and thereafter diligently pursues approval of the final plat. An Erosion and Sediment Control Permit may be issued after the following approvals are received: 1. Approval of an Over Lot Grading Plan (Proffer #3). 2. Approval of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. The final plat will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the following items are received: 1. A final plat that satisfies all of the requirements of section 14-303 and sections 14-304 through 14-318 of the Code, and the conditions attached to this letter. 2. Applicable fee outlined in the application. Please submit 9 copies of the final plat to the Community Development Department. The assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plat to all reviewing agencies (for ACSA, please submit 3 copies of construction plans directly to them). Once you receive the first set of comments on the final plat, please work with each reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements. The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final plat for signature until tentative approvals for the attached conditions from the following agencies/reviewers have been obtained: SRC Members: Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) - 2 copies Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) - 1 copy Albemarle County Information Services (E911) - 1 copy Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - 1 copy Virginia Department of Transportation - 2 copy Albemarle County Building Inspections - 1 copy Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) - 1 copy If you have any questions about these conditions or the submittal requirements please feel free to contact me at Extension 3443, cperez@albemarle.org. Sincerely, G Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 434-296-5832 Memorandum To: Scott Collins From: Christopher Perez, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: November 16, 2018 Subject: SDP201800073 Spring Hill Village — Initial Site Plan SUB201800172 Spring Hill Village — Preliminary Subdivision Plat The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan/plat referenced above once the following comments 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 furtherreview.): 1. [ZMA2013-17] A variation was approved by special exception in conjunction with a previous site plan for the realignment of the internal road system resulting in minor changes to acreage of adjacent blocks and green space, additionally phasing was altered (see the attached prev approved SE). Thus the current site plan shall either conform to the approved variation or a new variation is needed to facilitate the current site plan request. Prior to final site plan/final subdivision plat approval the variation shall be applied for and acted on. 2. [ZMA2013-17] The application plan requires a cul-de-sac in Block D. The site plan no longer depicts this cul-de-sac but rather an extension to the private road. This change requires a variation to the application plan, which shall be acted on by the Board of Supervisors prior to final site plan/final subdivision plat approval. 3. [ZMA2013-17, 32.5.2(a)] COD 3.3 Lot Regulations. Lots 32-44 in Block Clack required frontage on a public or private street. The proposed private access easement along the rear shall be revised to be a private street as approved on the application plan. Revise. 4. [ZMA2013-17, 32.5.2(a)] COD 3.3 Lot Regulations. The "private access easement" along the rear of Lots 17-31 in Block C shall be revised to a private alley and labeled as "private alley easement". [ZMA2013-17, 32.5.2(a)] COD 3.3 Lot Regulations. Some setbacks shown on the plan are not consistent with the Code of Development. Please amend or submit variation request for the change. The following inconsistencies were found: • Block A depicts a 20' front setback adjacent to Route 20; however, the COD requires 25'. The setback shall be measured from the area of the new r/w after the dedication. Revise. • Block A shows a 5' rear setback; however, the COD requires 15'. Revise. 6. [ZMA2013-17] The proposed yard drainage improvements and associated 10' easement, along with the storm sewer line and associated 20' easement on the southern property line shall be relocated to permit the required perimeter landscape screening and maintenance easement. As proposed the drainage and storm sewer improvements prohibit the screening requirements from being met. 7. [ZMA2013-17] COD 2.3. Establishment of Blocks. Block F and Block G have each been modified over their permissible 15% size difference from what was approved with the rezoning. Block F shall not be any larger than 0.72 acres and Block G shall not be any larger than 1.495 acres. Revise. 8. [ZMA2013-17, 32.5.2(b)] COD 8.1. Parks. The central community park in Block D shall be a minimum of 1.13 acres in size. Currently it is only proposed at .94 acres. Revise. 9. [ZMA2013-17, 32.5.2(b)] COD 8.1. Parks. Pocket park #4 in Block C shall be a minimum of 0.24 acres. Currently it is proposed as 0.18 acres. Revise. 10. [4.11.1] Decks may project not more than four (4) feet into any required yard; provided that no such feature shall be located closer than six (6) feet to any lot line. On the plans label and dimension all improvements to include garages and decks, as well as the encroachment into required yards. 11. [4.12.16(c)] Parallel Parking. Parallel parking spaces along the roadway (in parking areas) are required to be a minimum of 9' x 20'. Currently they are depicted as 7' x 20'. Revise. 12. [ZMA2013-17, 32.5.2(b)] COD 3.3 Lot Regulations. Provide acreages of all proposed lots. The COD specifies min/max lot sizes. For townhomes it is 1,000 SF minimum & 5,000 SF maximum. 13. [32.5.1(c)] All offsite easements must be approved and recorded prior to final site plan and final subdivision plat approval, this included easements for offsite utility connections and temporary construction easements if site work will encroach upon neighboring properties. Prior to final site plan approval any required easements will need to be plated. The DB page information of this action shall be provided on the final site plan. 14. [32.7.5.1, 4.1] Water supply and sewage system. Each development and each lot shall be served by the public water supply and the public sewer system. This development is relying on offsite infrastructure. Prior to final site plan and/or final subdivision plat approval the sewer connection shall either be built or bonded. 15. [Comment] The existing conditions sheet shall be revised to provide the County's adopted steep slopes overlay. 16. [ZMA2013-17] Affordable Housing. Designate which lots are the affordable units throughout the final site plan and final plat. Also, include a summary chart on the cover sheet of each document for tracking purposes. 17. [ZMA2013-17] Proffers. All proffers shall be adhered to as dictated in the proffers. 18. [32.6.2(e)] Public facilities and utilities. All water and sewer facilities to be dedicated to public use and the easements for those facilities and shall be identified by a statement that the facilities are to be dedicated to the Albemarle County Service Authority. 19. [32.6.2(j)] Landscape plan. A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 is required with the final site plan. 20. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Alleys. On the plan provide a note that states no public agency, including VDOT, and the County of Albemarle will be responsible for maintaining the alleys. Also, provide information on the plans that the alleys shall be dedicated and maintained by the HOA. 21. [32.8.2, 14-311] Infrastructure improvement plans. Road Plans and WPO application must be approved, all required improvements must be built or bonded, and all required Deeds and Declarations must be reviewed and approved prior to final site plan/ final subdivision plat approval. 22. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(0)] Areas to be dedicated. Provide a note stating that the land is to be dedicated for public use. Prior to final site plan approval any dedications shall take place on a plat to be reviewed by the County, approved, and then recorded in the Clerk's Office. The DB page information of this action shall be provided on the final site plan. 23. [14-317] Instrument evidencing maintenance of certain improvements. Submit with the final site plan/ final subdivision plat an instrument assuring the perpetual maintenance of street trees, private streets and alleys, open space and any other improvements that are to be maintained in perpetuity. 24. [Comment] The final site plan/ final subdivision plat shall not be approved until all SRC reviewers have approved the plan. Their comments attached. 25. [Citizen Communication] Attached is a Nov 8' letter from an adjacent neighbor, Roger Schickedantz, identifying some concerns for your consideration while developing the final site plan to address the above staff comments. Please contact Christopher Perez in the Planning Division by using cberez e,albemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext. 3443 for further information. Review Comments for SUB201800172 Preliminary Plat Project Name: Springhill - Preliminary Date Completed: Monday, November 05, 2018 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review sus: Reviewer: r Matthew Wentland F CDD Engineering Requested Changes 1_ The road plans will need to be approved and bonded before final plat approval- 2- The V MP plans will need to be approved and bonded before final plat approval_ I Show all proposed easements on the plat_ 4_ Proffer 3 (Over Lot Grading) can be shown on and satisfied with the V MP plan, as long as all items requested in the proffer are shown_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: l -V 16120'18 Review Comments for SDP201800073 lFinal Plat 1-1 Project Name: Springhill - Initial Date Completed: Friday, November 02, 2018 DepartmentlaivisionfAgency: Review Status: Revie er: FMichael Dellinger F-1 CDD Inspections LSI&O Recommendations Retaining walls greater than 3 feet in height require a separate building permit_ Walls exceeding 4 feet in height require an stamped engineered design also_ Building or structures built before Janriary 1 1985 must have an asbestos survey performed in order to apply for a demolition permit_ Asbestos removal permits are required if positive for srich Contact VDOLI for additional requirements and permits for demolition projects_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 11 V0512018 Review Comments for SUB201800172 Preliminary Plat Project Name: Springhill - Preliminary Date Completed: Friday, November 02, 2018 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: lSha n Maddox a Fire Rescue Requested ChangesEl 1 _ If the building heights are to exceed 30' then the travel ways must be increased to 26'- N o 6'_ No further comments on the plat_ SNM Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 'I'U'16120'18 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 1 e PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS - E911 APPLICATION#: SDP201800073 DATE: 11/7/2018 FROM: Andrew Walker awalker@albemarle.org Geographic Data Services (GDS) www.albemarle.org/gds (434) 296-5832 ext. 3031 The following road names are acceptable, and we have reserved them for this development: 1. LOYOLA WAY 2. DAUPHIN DR 3. BERWYN LN Critical Issues The proposed road name WARWICK COURT IS not acceptable, as there is an existing WARWICK COURT and WARWICK PLACE. Per Part I, Section 4-a of the County's Road Naming and Property Numbering Manual (page 6 of PDF): "A proposed road name which duplicates an existing or reserved road name in Albemarle County or the City of Charlottesville shall not be approved. An exception may be made for cul-de-sacs which have the same name as the road from which they originate (example: "Amberfield Court" which originates from "Amberfield Drive")." A new road name will need to be submitted. We recommend providing three (3) candidate names to our office for review, in case your first choices are not acceptable. Resources Please consult the County's Road Name Index to check your road names prior to submittal. The Index can be found here: http://www.albemarle.org/albemarle/upload/images/webapps/roads/ A PDF version of the Ordinance and Manual can be found here: https://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms Center/Departments/Geographic Data Service s/Forms/Road Namina and Pronertv Numberina Ordinance and Manual.ndf Parcel and mapping information can be found here: http://gisweb.albemarle.or If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Commissioner COMMON'WEALT'H of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper VAginia 2270' November 7, 2018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Christopher Perez Re: Spring Hill Village — Initial Site Plan & Preliminary Plat SDP -2018-00073 SUB -2018-00172 Review #1 Dear Mr. Perez: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated 24 September 2018, and offers the following comments: 1. The Route 20 entrance requires an Access Management Exception (AME) due to its proximity to the nearest commercial entrance. An AME was granted for a previously submitted, very similar, plan and may be acceptable to use for the proposed plan. Our 10 February 2017 AME approval letter should be included on the proposed plans. 2. The curve in Berwyn Lane at the intersection with Dauphin Drive does not appear to be necessary, but rather aesthetic. A more practical approach should be taken in the design of this intersection, particularly given its proximity to Route 20. 3. The correct intersection sight distance for a 25 mph design speed is 280 feet; this plan provides 225 feet (20 mph design speed). 4. The same intersection sight distance concerns from the previous plan for this parcel remain with the proposed plan, notably the left sight line at the Berwyn Lane intersection with Dauphin Drive. Profiles will be required to show that adequate sight distance is achievable. Additionally, the parallel parking along Dauphin Drive obstructs this sight line. 5. The minimum storage and taper lengths for 55 mph posted speed limit (60 mph design speed) is 200 feet for each. Please see Appendix F for these details as well as shifting taper lengths. 6. More detail is required for the Route 20 improvements, including the entrance improvements for the Gropen Facility. 7. The previously proposed plan (which is very similar to the currently proposed plan) for this parcel was reviewed by our office on four separate occasions, with the most recent review letter still containing more than twenty outstanding comments. Previous review letters can be provided to the applicant if desired. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING November 7, 2018 Christopher Perez Page 2 8. Note that the final site and subdivision/road plans must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual Appendices B(1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other requirements. Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. 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. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Review Comments for SDP201800073 lFinal Plat 1-1 Project Name: Springhill - Initial Date Completed: Tuesday, November 06, 2018 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Status: Reviewer: Richard Nelson L -J ACSA Pending I recommend approval for SDP 01800073 - Springhill Village - Initial Site Plan and SUB 0180017 - Springhill pillage - Prelim Sub Plat with the following conditions: Submit 3 copies to ACSA for review. Offsite easements }r5,ill be required for portions of sewer outside of the right -of -way - Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 1 1-VlG12018 Roger O. Schickedantz, AIA 1858 Scottsville Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 rschick@gmail.com 434-981-0164 cell November 8, 2018 To: Albemarle County Department of Community Development Attn: Christopher Perez Re: Comments regarding Spring Hill Village Development SDP201800073 Initial Site Plan SUB201800172 Preliminary Subdivision Plat Enclosed please find comments with respect to the property at 1858 Scottsville Rd., adjoining the southern border of the development property. 1. Proffer #4 references improvements to the adjacent property at 1858 Scottsville Rd. that may be needed due to roadway width changes. There is insufficient information in the submittal drawings to determine if the property improvements will be required. What is the plan for managing the steep slopes along the frontage of the 1858 Scottsville Rd. property? 2. In the October 8, 2014 Planning Commission hearing, Commissioners promoted an option for retaining walls along 1858 Scottsville Rd. to be natural stone due in support of the entrance corridor, and suggested that the ARB "review with attention" the material and design. How is the developer addressing this? 3. The drawings indicate a 10' landscaping buffer along the southern property line, yet the wooden fence is shown exterior to the buffer. Doesn't this defeat the intent of the buffer by definition? Can the fence be located inboard of the buffer? 4. A landscape buffer compatible with a rural aesthetic currently exists along approximately 60% of the property line adjoining the 1858 Scottsville Rd. property. Can this buffer not be retained? 5. Is the applicant required to provide location and species of buffer vegetation? The Certificate of Appropriateness ARB -2016-30 requires a schedule of plant species. 6. ARB -2016-30 also requires clarification of the extent of tree removal. Tree removal is already occurring along the southern property line. It is not clear how the topography will be modified to accommodate the units, and where retaining walls will be required in the vicinity of the southern property line. The language of Proffer #3 requires a detailed topographic plan. 8. There is a change from the original approval submission in the units facing the southern property line from detached to attached. This changes the aesthetic to a continuous building wall. Is that change permissible within the terms of the original approval? Roger O. Schickedantz, AIA 9. Will cars be allowed to park on the dead-end street running perpendicular to the southern property line? This is objectionable. 10. What is the intent for site regrading and erosion control? p. 2 of 2 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434-296-5832 Fax 434-972-4126 To: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors From: Rachel Falkenstein, Senior Planner Date: December 6, 2017 Re: Request for Special Exception for variations to the Application Plan and Code of Development for ZMA201300007 Spring Hill Village for changes to the road alignment, adjacent block sizes and phasing. TMP: 09000-00-00-02800 Magisterial District: Scottsville Magisterial District School Districts: Cale Elementary, Walton Middle, Monticello High Zoning District: Neighborhood Model District (NMD) Summary of Request for Special Exception: The applicant is requesting minor changes to the Application Plan and Code of Development (COD) for Spring Hill Village. Specifically, the applicant is proposing a realignment of the internal road system resulting in minor changes to acreage of adjacent blocks and green space. The applicant also proposes a minor change to phasing. County Code § 18-8.5.5.3 and § 18-33.5 allow special exceptions to vary approved Application Plans and Codes of Development upon considering whether the proposed variation: (1) is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan; (2) does not increase the approved development density or intensity of development; (3) does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any other development in the zoning district; (4) does not require a special use permit; and (5) is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved application. County Code § 18-33.5(a)(1) requires that any request for a variation be considered and acted upon by the Board of Supervisors as a special exception. This request is consistent with the above noted considerations. Please see Attachment B for full details of staff s analysis. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment C) to approve the special exceptions. Attachments: A — Application Materials (Applicant justification; revised application plan, revised Code of Development) B — Staff Analysis C — Resolution N", 1951 1=100". CONCEPTS, PC MEMORANDUM DATE: November 29, 2016 TO: Albemarle County Zoning Office FROM: Mark Keller —Terra Concepts, PC RE: Spring Hill Village — ZMA 2013-00017 — Variation Request The information below is intended to accompany the Application for Variations and Approved Plans, Codes and Standards of Development for the above project. Variations Being Sought: After approval of the rezoning, and as a part of their review of the Initial Site Plan for Phase 1 of this project, VDOT decided to revisit their approval of the planned road system. Numerous iterations and option were explored with VDOT and a consensus was finally reached. The result was that sections of internal road were realigned. This resulted in changes to acreages of adjacent Blocks as well as Green and Amenity Space. All of the acreage impacts were within the ranges permitted by the Code of Development. However, since tables listing these acreages are found on the same drawing (Block Plan -Sheet 3) as the road realignment, these figures were also updated. Collaterally, several housekeeping matters were addressed. First, in the Density Table at the top right of the Block Plan, Block C had been listed to be in Phase 2. The submitted Initial Site Plan included all of Phase 1 and Block C as well. Staff requested that we change Block C's designation to Phase 1 instead. This was done. Finally, a note was added to the bottom of the Amenity and Green Space Calculations table on this sheet. Since some of this data is also reflected in the Code of Development in Sections 3 and 8, for consistency, we chose to make commensurate updates in the code as well. Reasons & Justifications VDOT determined that two 90 degree intersections, as opposed to the approved curvilinear main road alignment, would better serve the community in terms of safety and would be more likely to discourage cut - through traffic between Avon Street Extended and Route 20. By and large we were able to accommodate the design changes they requested within the limitations outlined in the approved Code of Development, so we feel that the proposed changes remain consistent with prior approvals and the Code for this property. That said, we did choose to make the above housekeeping changes associated with comments received during initial site plan review at this time. MASTER & SITE PLANNING / ENTITLEMENT PROCESSING / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 2046 Rock Quarry Road • Louisa, Virginia 23093 • 434-531-3600 • mkeller@terraconceptspc.com II � I�� o J � - SCOTI �I__--- 4 ----- I II I I i i i i i ^ co DAO N � IA I 1 I 1 I 1 i I 1 YF--iI I 1 1 i g�z"ssioFINAL SITE PLAN FOR BLOCKS B -G T blvAtTl SPRING HILL VILLAGEow6�d o w R 3 I N ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA APPLICATIION/BLOCK PLANT ' n 9 • ®sem • E II � I�� o J � - SCOTI �I__--- 4 ----- I II I I i i i i i ^ co DAO N � IA I 1 I 1 I 1 i I 1 YF--iI I 1 1 i g�z"ssioFINAL SITE PLAN FOR BLOCKS B -G T blvAtTl SPRING HILL VILLAGEow6�d o w R 3 I N ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA APPLICATIION/BLOCK PLANT ' n 9 SPRING HILL VILLAGE Code of Development ZMA # 2013-00017 Dated October 16, 2013 Revised January 21, 2014 Revised March 4, 2 014 Revised March 31, 2014 Revised May 16, 2 014 Revised July 7, 2 014 Revised August 28, 2014 Revised November 8, 2016 13 BUILDING FORM STANDARDS 3.1 Purpose The regulations contained in this section are promulgated (i) with the intent that the form of buildings in Spring Hill Village will foster a vibrant pedestrian -scale neighborhood community, with architectural and landscape elements that complement and enhance building design and (ii) to create a flexible range of density over the designated blocks described herein. 3.2 Density Regulations Table 0 establishes the parameters within which residential and non-residential shall be developed. For the purposes of interpreting Table 0, no site plan or subdivision plat shall be approved unless it conforms to the following standards: A. For residential uses, there shall be a minimum and maximum of residential dwelling units for Spring Hill Village at full build -out. Within this range, the Owner may adjust the residential unit type and density by block to meet market and design considerations. B. For non-residential uses, there shall be a minimum and a maximum amount of gross floor area required/permitted. Within this range, the Owner may adjust the non- residential use and density by block to meet market and design considerations. Density by Block Residential Non -Residential Block Size Phase Min. Max. Min. Max. A 0.6 AC. 2 01 122 02 60,000 B 1.4 AC. 2 01 483 o2 60,000 C 3.2 AC. 1 01 302 O2 60,000 D 4.5 AC. 1 14 402 0 0 E 1.1 AC. 1 8 162 0 0 F 0.7 AC. 1 6 162 0 0 G 1.4 AC. 1 4 122 0 0 Presumes development as non-residential use. 2 A minimum of 10,000 SF of non-residential use is being proffered for Spring Hill Village. 2 O14N SPACE & AMENITIES 8.1 Parks The Owner has set aside 2.68 acres of the property as Amenity Space, which is 21% of the total site area after a small area (0.04 acre) of the current site is dedicated to road right-of-way. As the plan for the proposed community evolves certain elements may change size or location in a minor way. Shifts of this nature and magnitude may result in very minor changes in the acreages associated with Green Space and Amenity Space. In all cases, the minimum requirements for Green and Amenity Space shall be met. Comprising the Amenity Area is a central park of just over Z acre and three pocket parks located throughout the proposed community. A conceptual design for the park is reflected within the plan submission. The main park will provide opportunities for both active and passive recreational activities. A tot lot complex with separate areas for dynamic and static play equipment are proposed. The play equipment to be installed shall meet or exceeding the County requirements and will provide safe and age- appropriate activity areas for children. A pavilion surrounded by paved surface will be a place for gatherings, events and shaded observation of the tot lot areas. Along the southern axis of the pavilion a large lawn panel is being set aside for organized sports. This area will also serve as a spectator area should the pavilion host movie nights or live performances. It is large enough to accommodate one or more tents that may be used for special events. The system of pocket parks is intended to offer a variety of recreational opportunities. The easternmost Pocket Park is a large, rectangular area taking up most of the property frontage along Route 20. It can be used for a variety of sports and an area to walk pets. The central Pocket Park which is not roadside is designed to evolve pursuant to the direction determined by the future residents of the community. (DELETED - Pocket Park #3 is an area adjacent to the main connector road and is a small eddv off of the road where one can sit and relax on a bench amongst trees shrubs and flowers. Packet Park #4 is across the street from #3 and is proposed to be set up as a shady retreat within a bosaue of trees.) The westernmost Pocket Park is located at the intersection of the connector road and Avon Street Extended. It is envisioned as a possible location for a school bus stop. As such it will provide an alcove with landscaping and seating where children can await the bus and parents can congregate as they wait for kids to be dropped off. As the community develops and its demographics evolve the uses within these amenity areas may also evolve. It is the Applicant's intent that the central park be developed as described, but that the residents of Spring Hill Village have a say in how the pocket parks are used or further improved. 3 STAFF PERSON: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Rachel Falkenstein December 6, 2017 Staff Report for Special Exception to Vary the Code of Development and Application Plan approved with ZMA201300007 Spring Hill Village Applicant's Request The applicant is seeking minor changes to street design and street location internal to the proposed development. The changes were a result of VDOT's determination that two 90 degree intersections, as opposed to the approved curvilinear main road alignment, would better serve the community in terms of safety and would be more likely to discourage cut -through traffic between Avon Extended (Rte. 742) and Scottsville Road (Rte 20). The changes were approved by the County Engineer [§ 18-8.5.5.3a5]. These changes result in minor alterations in acreage for Blocks C - G, but no Block changes by more than 0.1 acres, as seen in the revised Code of Development. The new road alignment also influences the Open and Amenity Space, decreasing acreage from 2.83 acres to 2.81. The number of pocket parks also drops from five to four. Overall, these variations in open space results less than a 1% difference and still meets the Neighborhood Model District's (NMD) open space requirements. There is also a minor change to the phasing plan, where Block C changes from phase 2 to phase 1 [§ 18- 8.5.5.3a3]. VARIATIONS FROM APPROVED PLANS, CODES, AND STANDARDS OF DEVELOPMENT Each variation request has been reviewed for zoning and planning aspects of the regulations. Variations are considered by the Board of Supervisors as a Special Exception under County Code §§ 18-33.5 and 18- 33.9. Staff analysis under County Code § 18-8.5.5.3(c) is provided below. 1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. The variation is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of development. The variation does not pertain to density. 3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any other development in the zoning district. The phasing of block C is changing from phase 2 to phase 1 but does not adversely affect any other development in the zoning district. 4) The variation does not require a special use permit. A special use permit is not required. 5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning application. This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application. RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR ZMA201300007 SPRING HILL VILLAGE TO VARY ROAD ALLIGNMENT, BLOCK SIZES AND PHASING ON APPLICATION PLAN AND CODE OF DEVELOPEMNT WHEREAS, the Owner of Tax Map Parcel Number 09000-00-00-02800 filed a request for a special exception to vary the Application Plan and Code of Development approved in conjunction with ZMA201300007 Spring Hill Village to vary the road alignment, block sizes and phasing as shown on the Exhibit entitled "Spring Hill Village Application/Block Plan" dated August 4, 2017 and the revised code of development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the Memorandum prepared in conjunction with the special exception request and the attachments thereto, including staff's supporting analysis, and all of the factors relevant to the special exceptions in Albemarle County Code §§ 18-8.5.5.3, 18-33.5, and 18-33.9, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the special exception to vary the Application Plan and Code of Development approved in conjunction with ZMA201300007 Spring Hill Village, as described hereinabove. I, Claudette K. Borgersen, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of to , as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on Ave Nay Mr. Dill Ms. Mallek Ms. McKeel Ms. Palmer Mr. Randolph Mr. Sheffield Clerk, Board of County Supervisors