Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900015 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2019-09-05County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memarandnm To: Scott Collins, P.E. (scott(&collins-en ing eering com) From: Cameron Langille — Senior Planner Division: Planning Services Date: April 25, 2019 First Revision: September 5, 2019 Subject: SDP201900015 — Brookhill Block 8B - Final Site Plan The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department Community Development will recommend approval of 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.] Comments from SDP20180054 - Brookhill Block 8B Initial Site Plan Action Letter: [32.5.2 (i)] Please address the following comments related to road improvements: a. The final site plan for Block 8B will need to accurately depict all improvements within the right-of-ways visible on the plans. A road plan application must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to final site plan and final plat approval. Once the road plans are approved, the right of ways for new streets in Block 8B must be reviewed, approved, and recorded prior to final site plan approval. Rev. 1: Applicant has acknowledged that a road plan will be submitted for review and approval prior to final site plan approval. Rev. 2: Comment no longer applies — all units proposed in Block 813 will be multifamily units, no new lots are being created for individual units, and therefore all Block 813 transportation corridors are classified as travelways that can be reviewed/approved as part of the final site plan. b. 114-410 and 14-4221 Alley A must have sidewalks and street trees along both sides of the street. Rev. 1: Alley has been re -named to Noush Court. Based on re -design of the development, Noush Court meets the standards for design as an alley in accordance with Section 2.8 of the COD and the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance. Please re -label Noush Court as a "Private Alley" on all applicable sheets. Rev. 2: Comment no longer applies — all units proposed in Block 813 will be multifamily units, no new lots are being created for individual units, and therefore all Block 813 transportation corridors are classified as travelways that can be reviewed/approved as part of the final site plan. c. All roads shown within Block 8B are labeled as proposed private streets or private alleys. Per Section 2.8.1 on pages 24-25 of the Code of Development, the following streets within Block 8B are required to follow the "Neighborhood Streets — VDOT Public Roads" standard: all of Wesley Circle, Noush Lane, and Road E. The streets shown do not have the required features for the Neighborhood Streets type, including parking along one side of the street. Please revise. If the layout and design of Block 8B is affected due to widening the right of way to incorporate on -street parking, the site plan and preliminary plat may need to go through the site review committee again. Rev. 1: based on the re -design of the Block 8B layout, the onlypublicstreets needed to meet the Counv's subdivision standards and the Brookhill COD requirements are Wesley Circle from the intersection with Stella Lane to the intersection with Wesley Lane, and Wesley Lane from the intersection with Wesley Circle and Noush Court. All required public street segments currently meet the standards for the Neighborhood Streets Cross Section from Section 2.8 (page 24 of the COD). Please see VDOT comments for additional items to be addressed based on the road design. Rev. 2: Comment no longer applies — all units proposed in Block 813 will be multifamily units, no new lots are being created for individual units, and therefore all Block 813 transportation corridors are classified as travelways that can be reviewed/approved as part of the final site plan. d. Please label all roads visible on Block 8B final subdivision plat with a width measurement and state whether the road is public or private. Prior to final plat approval, all street right of ways that have been dedicated to public use or under private easement should feature a label stating the deed book and page number. Rev. 1: Noush Court ends to be re -labeled as a "Private Alley" and state whether it will be an easement, or will be in fee simple part of the lots adjacent to it. This will be an issue that comes up during review of the Block 8B final site plan. See Section 14-236 of the Subdivision Ordinance for more information. Rev. 2: Comment no longer applies — all units proposed in Block 8B will be multifamily units, no new lots are being created for individual units, and therefore all Block 8B transportation corridors are classified as travelways that can be reviewed/approved as part of the final site plan. 2. [General Comment] Lots 16-27 do not meet minimum frontage requirements because their driveway is shown along Alley A/Noush Court and the other side of the lot fronts along a private street "Road E." See page 30 of the Code of Development for further information. Rev. 1: Comment addressed based on current re -design. a. Per discussion between staff and the applicant at the Site Review Committee Meeting, the plans will be revised so that Road E is designed to the "Neighborhood Streets — VDOT Public Roads standard in Section 2.8.1 of the COD. Rev. 1: Comment addressed based on current re -design. 3. IZMA2015000071 Sheet 2 is not the approved Application Plan. Revise to include the approved plan that was modified at the Board of Supervisors meeting to not include the trailhead at Ashwood Blvd. Link to approved plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 4. [Application Plan; COD; Proffers] When will the greenway easement within Block 8A be dedicated to public use? Per proffer #2 of ZMA201500007, the greenway must be dedicated to the County. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Please be aware that the C2mpty can reguest dedication of the greenwal at the times sl2ecified by the approved proffers. 2.4 Greenspace and Amenities Brookhill will feature over 100 acres of Greenspace This Greenspace represents more than 35% of the entire community's land area, and includes the Buffer areas, the Greenway and stream buffers, parks and civic amenity areas, and general open space The Greenspace will not only provide a linear trail system throughout the community, but shall also preserve environmentally sensitive areas such as steep slopes, streams, and stream buffers All of the Greenspace areas shall be located outside of private lots and right -of --way All Greenspace within Brooklull, with the exception of the Greenwway, will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. Establishment of the buffers, trails, and amenities within the Greenspace will be the responsibility of the developer tlpoii written rcqucsl by the County, but not prior rn the issuance of the live hundredtli (5f}0tk) Permit for a k1wc1ling within the l'rnjed, the Owner shall dLAicalo to lltc County an cawinein for public use over the Greenwoy area, :a; shown on ihu Application flan. Prior to the C'ounty's request to dedicate such easement, the Owner inay dedicate portions of the Greenway by casein nt concurrently with one or more subs iti ision plats for areas lying adjacent tL) the Gnr onway: providvd however, that Owner may reserve iti such Cascinc:itti. rights of access for grading, u1111LIcs and maintenance. hack subdivision plat shall depicl the (;reenu•ay area to be dedicated and shall bear a notation tha! the Grecriway urea is dedicated for public use. II-, at the tiii,e the C'oumy rquesIs dedicall (in oft h e Grcenway . any 1);rrt of the Grecnway itiat has not been dedicated by subdivisioa plat, shall be (within six (6) nlunTh.; of sx,ch roilucsi) at Owner's cost, sun eyed. putted and recorded with n n e or inore deals of easeincnl dedication. 5. [ZMA201500007] In accordance with Section 2.14 on page 31 of the COD, lots 31-35 do not qualify as amenity oriented lots because there is not an open area that is 50' in width from face of building to face of building. These lots must be served by a public street. See comment #2 above for further information. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 6. [32.5.2 (o) and ZMA2015000071 Please expand the Block Area Summary on Sheet 3 to include all the columns contained in Table 2 of the Code of Development. The required and proposed acreages of each feature should also be stated so that staff can verify compliance with the minimum requirements for greenspace/amenities, as well as the development area requirements. a. The proposed acreages of each feature in Blocks 3 and 4 that are currently under site plan review should also be stated even though they are not part of the Block 8B initial site plan/preliminary plat review. Rev. 1: These acreages apear to be incorrect on the Block Area Summary. Please verify. Rev. 2: Staff has reviewed the Block 8A final site plan (dated 7/1/2019) table to verify whether acreages of certain features match up and are correct. The following were identified as not matching: the Block 4C row is missing acreages for Greenwav Required (2.31 acres according to Block 8A final site plan), Open Space Required (1.46 acres according to Block 8A final site plan), and Total Greenspace Required (0.85 acres according to Block 8A final site plan). The Block 4 row is missing acreages for the following: Civic/Parks Proposed (1.38 acres according to Block 8A final site plan), Greenwav Proposed (1.09 acres according to Block 8A final site plan), Open Space Proposed (0.44 acres according to Block 8A final site plan), and Buffers Proposed (2.97 acres). The Total Greenspace Proposed column is missing acreages for Block 4A (2.09 acres according to Block 8A final site plan) and Block 4B (3.07 acres according to Block 8A final site plan). b. The Block Area Summary on Sheet 3 does not include the proposed acreage of Block 4C, please revise. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. c. Under "Land Areas" on Sheet 1, please state the acreage of land within the "development area" as shown in Table 2 on page 6 of the Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The proposed development area of Blocks 8A and 8B must be filled in on the table on Sheet 3. Please coordinate with the engineer workingon n the Block 8A site plan to ensure that the figures are correct. Rev. 2: Comment not fullv addressed. The Development Area Proposed column is blank for Block 8B, please state the acreage. The Block 8 row is missing acreages in the Civic/Parks Proposed column, the Greenwav Proposed column, the Open Space proposed column, and the Buffer Proposed column. The Total Greenspace Proposed Column is missing acreages in the Block 8A and 8B rows. d. The "Land Areas" note should also contain the proposed acreage of amenity areas. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The 0.20 acre courtyard amenity proposed in Block 8B is classified as "Open Space" under Section 2.4.3 of the COD. The acreage for this feature is currently listed under "Parks/Civic Areas" column on the Block Area Summary table on Sheet 3. Please revise the table as necessary so that Block 8B amenity area is included in the total acreage figure provided for Block 8B under the "Open Space" column in the table. Rev. 2: See comment #59 below. 7. [32.5.2 (a)] The land area of all blocks in Brookhill may not be modified more than 15% of the gross land area shown in Table 2 (page 6) of the Code of Development. Please be aware that the proposed gross land area (20.7 acres) of Block 8A and 8B is currently modified by 20% (5.1 acres less than the acreage specific in the COD), according to the Total Project Area on Sheet 1. This is not permitted. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Total area of Block 8 is now listed as 25.52 acres which complies with the block acreage modification allowances specified in the COD. a. The "Land Areas" and "Open Space Provided" sections on Sheet 1 do not match the "Total Project Area" on Sheet 1, or the Block Area Summary on Sheet 3, or the Open Space Calculation on Sheet 5. Please revise and comply with the requirements of Table 2 of the Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Total area of Block 8 is now listed as 25.52 acres which complies with the block acreage modification allowances specified in the COD. 8. 132.5.2 (a)] Please amend the watershed note on Sheet 1 to state whether that is a water supply watershed. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 9. [32.5.2 (a)] Prior to final site plan approval and plat approval, please revise the Existing Conditions and all other applicable drawings where adjacent properties are visible. The correct so that the correct Tax Map Parcel numbers for the Block 3A Ice Rink and Block 4 apartments may exist by the time of final review and these should be labeled with the correct deed book and instrument number. Rev. 1: Comment stands, multiple subdivision applications are still under review. Final site plan will need to be updated with recorded instrument numbers once subdivision plats are approved and recorded. Rev. 2: Comment still applies. SUB201900117 and SUB201900123 are both under review and will affect Block 8B and the existing parcel boundaries. Once these plats are approved and recorded, please update the site plan as necessary so all TMP numbers and boundaries are correct, and parcel acreages/recorded instrument numbers are stated in the labels on each drawing. 10. [32.5.2 (a)] On Sheet 1, please state the Special Use Permit application number that was approved to allow grading activities in the Flood Hazard Overlay District. The approved application number is SP201500025 and the County approval date was November 9, 2016. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. a. Please add the approved conditions of SP201500025 to the final site plan. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The approved conditions of SP201500025 are not provided as exhibits on the final site plan. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. The conditions approved with SP201500025 are still missing. Staff have attached the conditions to this comment letter to be added as exhibits to the final site plan. 11. [32.5.2 (a)] Under Zoning on Sheet 1, please state the Board of Supervisors approval date of November 9, 2016 to the notes for both SP201500025 and ZMA201500007. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 12. [32.5.2 (a)] Please amend the Zoning note on Sheet 1 to include all applicable overlay districts. It should state Neighborhood Model Development District as the primary zoning district. Block 8B also lies within the following overlay districts: EC - Entrance Corridor Overlay, AIA — Airport Impact Overlay, and Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes Overlay Zoning Districts. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Please revise the title of the FH Overlay_ District. It should state " FH - Flood Hazard Overlay Zoning District." Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 13. 132.5.2 (c)] The limits of Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes are not shown on the drawings as stated in the Note on Sheet 1. Please show the limits of these features. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Please add labels to all drawings where the steep slopes overlay district is visible. The slopes are drawn but not labeled on the grading and drainage drawing 2: Comment addressed. a. Please be aware that all Preserved Steep Slopes areas must be located within open space and need to be shown on the final site plan and plat. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Please add labels to all drawings where the steep slopes overlay district is visible. The slopes are drawn but not labeled on the grading and drainage drawing. Rev. 2: Per comment #59 below, please show the Preserved Steep Slopes on the drawing showing the portion of Block 8B on the west side of Archer Avenue where the proposed open space and future greenway are located. 14. 132.5.2 (a)] Please add a note to Sheet 1 titled "Block Classification" with "Neighborhood Density Residential" as the block type for Block 813, as stipulated by the Brookhill Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 15. 132.5.2 (b)] The Zoning Administrator and Director of Planning have determined that the proposed use in Block 8B is considered "Attached Single -Family Dwelling Units" as described in Sections 2.2.2 and 2.3.2.3 of the Code of Development and the County Zoning Ordinance. Please amend the "Proposed Use" on Sheet 1 to state "55 Attached Single -Family Residential Parcels — 110 Total Dwelling Units. See attached email. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. a. Please remove the use note on the drawings that states Block 8B is a multi -family condominium. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 16. [32.5.2 (b)] Please state the maximum building footprint permitted on Sheet 1 in accordance with Table 2.3.2.3 on page 18 of the COD. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 17. 132.5.2 (b)] Please state the minimum and maximum lot sizes permitted in Block 8B in accordance with Section 2.3.2.3 on page 18 of the Code of Development. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 18. 132.5.2 (a)] Please amend the setbacks note on Sheet 1. It should state all permitted setbacks (including porches and garages, as well as the notes column) in accordance with Table 2.3.2.3 from page 18 of the Brookhill Code of Development. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. a. The porches setback figure is incorrect, porches must be setback a minimum of 5' along the front property lines. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Please revise the garage setback figures stated. The exhibit from page 30 of the Code of Development should be added as an inset to the setbacks note. The garage setbacks are different depending on the road scenario adjacent to a given lot. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Per the note for the garage setback on Sheet 1, Block 8B will follow scenario 2 from Figure 12 (page 30) of the COD. Please add Figure 12 from the COD as an exhibit to the plans. In the garage setback note on Sheet 1, reference the page number of the site plan where the exhibit is provided. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 19. [32.5.2 (a)] The minimum parking requirement calculation note on Sheet 1 is incorrect. Parking must be provided in accordance with Section 2.9 of the COD, and the garage and driveway exhibit shown on page 30 of the Code of Development. a. Each single-family lot must have a minimum of 2 off-street parking spaces. Since each lot will have two separate dwelling units, a minimum of 220 parking spaces total are required in Block 8B. There are currently on 36 on -street parking spaces provided, with a presumed 110 parking spaces (two each lot) on private lots. Please add the additional 4 parking spaces as required. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 20. 132.5.2 (b)] Please amend the "Allowable Density" note on Sheet 1. The allowable density for Block 8B is 2-6 dwelling units/acre. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 21. [32.5.2 (b)] Please provide a calculation of the proposed units per acre for Block 8B and overall Block 8. The "Proposed Density" note on sheet 1 does not state this. a. Please be aware that the du/acre proposed within Block 8B is approximately 15 du/acre as proposed. The Zoning Administrator has stated that the 110 dwelling units can be constructed in Block 8B as long as the future uses in Block 8A are not dwelling units. Essentially, the overall density throughout the entirety of Block 8 cannot exceed the 2-6 unit range. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The initial site plan for Block 8A is proposing to utilize the Greenspace portion of Block 8 located on the west side of Stella Lane to meet the density requirements associated with the senior living fg acility. The Block 8B plans are also proposing to use that Greenspace area in order to make 8B meet the density range specified by the COD. The Greenspace Area can not be counted for calculatingdensity within both Block 8A and 8B. Please provide an explanation of the intent moving forward. Otherwise, B1ock8B may need to reduce the number of lots if the Greenspace area will be calculated as part of the Block 8A density_ Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. A variation to the COD is scheduled to go to the Board of Supervisors on October 16, 2019 to increase the maximum number of dwelling units and density range of Block 8 overall. If this is approved by the Board, the "Allowable Density" and "Proposed Density" info on Sheet 1 will need to be revised in accordance with the new allowed density range of Block 8 per the revised COD. 22. [32.5.2 (a)] Per Table 2.3.2.3 of the Code of Development, please show the minimum and maximum setback lines locations across all applicable drawings. Label each setback line as a front, side, corner side, or rear setback and state the dimensions in the label. Setbacks should be measured from the proposed right-of-way. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The proposed parcel boundaries are difficult to distinguish on the plans, so staff cannot verify whether setbacks are met at this point. Please clearly delineate proposed parcel boundaries so that setbacks can be measured. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 23. 132.5.2 (n)] Pedestrian crosswalks must be provided at all locations within the site where ramps connect sidewalks on opposite sides of vehicular travel ways. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. a. Please label the dimensions and surface materials in compliance with the County's design standards. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 24. 132.5.2 (n)] Please label and call out the locations of the primary and secondary building entrances to the building in accordance with the Neighborhood Density Residential block regulations Section 2.2.3 (page 11) of the Code of Development. Rev.1 Comment addressed. a. Lots 16-27 and 31-35 do not currently meet the required building entrance locations since they do not front on a public street or amenity area. Final site plan and plat will not be approved until these lots front on a public street or an amenity area. Rev.1 Comment addressed. 25. IZMA2015000071 No setbacks lines are shown on Lots 32-37, please revise. Rev. 1: See comment #22 above. Rev. 2: Comment not longer applies. No individual lots are proposed. 26. 132.5.2 (a)] Block 8B must provide the minimum recreation area and facilities specified in Section 4.16 of the Zoning Ordinance. State the equipment for the playground area as well as what kind of sport court is being proposed. Show the materials and dimensions. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 27. [32.5.2 (k)] Please show the location of all proposed sewer and drainage easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width measurement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 28. [32.5.2 (1)] Please label all utility easements as "proposed" with a size/width measurement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 29. [32.5.2 (n)] Please state the proposed surface materials for all parking lots, travel ways, walkways, etc. in a label on the site plan drawings. Rev.1 Comment addressed. 30. [COD; 32.5.2(a)] Some retaining wall heights exceed the 6' maximum requirement specified in the COD on pages 23-24. Please revise. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 31. 132.5.2 (e)] Please provide more details about the existing landscape features as described in Section 18-32.7.9.4(c). a. The Albemarle County Conservation Plan Checklist and Chapter 3.38 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control handbook. The Conservation Plan Checklist will need to be signed by the owners and provided as an exhibit on the final site plan for Block 8B. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 32. [32.7.9] The landscaping plan has none of the required information regarding the proposed landscaping, and is not clear. A detailed landscape plan in accordance with the ordinance is required for final site plan at a scale of 1"=30'. It appears that required landscaping is located within lots, if so, an easement on those lots will be required. Additional comments will be given at final site plan once a full landscape plan with more detail is submitted. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 33. [32.7.91 Please provide individual landscaping schedules for required landscaping in accordance with Sections 32.7.9.5, 32.7.9.6, 32.7.9.7, 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. Each schedule should state the Botanical Name and Common Name of each species proposed, the proposed caliper and height at time of installation, and the canopy coverage canopy coverage area per plant species. The canopy area for each species can be found on the Albemarle County Recommended Plants List and Albemarle County Plants Canopy Calculations tables. PDFs of these documents can be accessed through the Department of Community Development webpage: LINK. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 34. 132.7.9.5, and 14-410, and 14-4221 Street trees are not shown along Roads F, E, and Alley A. Please revise the landscaping plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Street trees are shown along all proposed public and private streets as required by the COD and Zoning Ordinance. 35. 132.7.9.61 The 9 space parking lot at the south of Block 8B will need to be screened in accordance with Section 32.7.9.6 and 32.7.9.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff cannot verify if the provided trees meet the minimum 5% canopy requirement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 36. [32.7.9.8 (a)] Please provide a calculation for the minimum tree canopy required and proposed in Block 813 based on the use type. The minimum tree canopy is 20% based on the density of Block 8B. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. a. [32.7.9.8 (b)] Please provide a landscape schedule that lists the Botanical Name and Common Name of each species is included, the proposed caliper and height at time of installation, and the canopy coverage area per plant species as stated on the Albemarle County Plants Canopy Calculations (this table should be specifically for the 20% minimum tree canopy requirement). Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 37. [32.7.9.91 Please add a note to the Landscape plans stating "All landscaping shall be installed by the first planting season following the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within the development." Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 38. 132.7.9.91 Please add a note to the Landscape plans stating "All landscaping and screening shall be maintained in a healthy condition by the current owner or a property owners' association, and replaced when necessary. Replacement material shall comply with the approved landscape plan." Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 39. [32.6.2 (h)] Please provide a signature panel with a line for each member of the Site Review Committee. A copy of the SRC signature panel template is attached. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 40. [ZMA201500007] Per Proffer #9A-C and Section 2.13 of the Code of Development, the historic marker to commemorate the Brookhill manor house shall be installed with the first phase of development. The marker is shown in different areas on the road plans for Block 3 and the Block 8B plans. Please clarify the location. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 41. [ZMA201500007] Notes 1 and 4 on Sheet 1 conflict with what is shown on the plans. a. Drainage easements and required landscaping buffers (30' Polo Ground Road and the Block 19 buffer) must be within private easements to be owned and maintained by the Brookhill HOA. These will not be dedicated to public use, so Note 1 needs to be revised for clarity. b. Note 4 needs to be revised. If any landscaping required by the Zoning Ordinance will be within open space parcels, the HOA will maintain those features. All required street trees must be located within public or private road right of ways. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 6 42. [14-317] An instrument evidencing maintenance of all required improvements that will not be owned or maintained by the County is required with the final plat. This includes private street and alley easements, sidewalk easements (if applicable), buffer easements, landscaping easements (if applicable), etc. Rev. 1: Comment stands. Easements can be created at the time of final plat review. Rev. 2: Pending review and approval of the subdivision plats currently under review, this comment may no longer apply since no new streets are being created. Sidewalks, travelways, etc. do not need easements private easements if located within a private development lot. 43. [General Comment] Please provide a narrative regarding the timeline for installation of the required 20' undisturbed and new landscaping buffer around the Brookhill manor house in Block 19 that is adjacent to Block 8B. Please see Section 2.4.2 of the Code of Development for the manor house buffer requirements. a. The Road 1B application (SUB201800115) proposes to disturb land and some existing trees on/adjacent to Block 19. Some drawings delineate an "Existing 20' buffer" near Block 19. The buffer needs to be located adjacent to but outside of the parcel boundaries of Block 19, per Section 2.4.2 and 2.13 of the COD. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Pending applicant response to this comment, western and southern portions of the buffer may need to be shown on the Block 8B final site plan as required landscaping. The COD appears to allow the Block 19 buffer requirement to be satisfied in two general methods: i. Submit a subdivision plat to create the 3 +/- acre Block 19 parcel and include a buffer easement around the parcel on that plat. A landscaping typical section for the buffer will need to be provided as a plat detail specifying the types and quantities of vegetation to be planted in the buffer easement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Existing tree canopy is shown on plans and will be located within open space parcels associated with Block 813. Please be aware that prior to final plat approval, and instrument evidencing maintenance of the existing trees and vegetation within that buffer will need to be provided for review. It will then be recorded with the plat. ii. Install each side of the buffer as part of the subdivision plat, site plan, or road plan for adjacent blocks, including Block 8B. The landscaping plan for these applications will specify the types and quantities of vegetation to be planted in the buffer easement. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 44. [4.17] Please provide a full lighting plan with the final site plan in compliance with Section 4.17 of the Zoning Ordinance. Rev. 1: Comment not fullv addressed. Per applicant response to the initial comment. porch lights will be installed on each residential structure. Please add a note to Sheet 1 stating `Lighting — all proposed luminaries will meet the outdoor lighting standards specified in Section 4.17 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance." Rev. 2: Comment partially addressed. The requested note has been added, but staff requests final verification that no pole lights are being proposed at this time, and the only lights within Block 8B will be porch lights on the residential structures? If this is true, please amend the note so that it states "addition of future liLyhts bevond Dorch lights will reauire site plan amendment to comDly with Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance." 45. [General Comment] The plans label a Day Breach Dam Break Inundation Zone. However, Albemarle County GIS shows no state dam break inundation zones within the development. Please clarify. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 46. [General Comment] Please revise the Sheet List Table on Sheet 1 to match the sheet numbers provided. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 47. [General Comment] Please see the attached document from the United States Postal Service regarding approval by the USPS for mail delivery locations. It is up to the applicant to coordinate a centralized mail delivery location for the lots in Block 8B in accordance with USPS requirements. Staff may ask for written verification from the USPS that a mail delivery location has been approved by the post master during review of the final plans. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. New Planning Comments First Review of Block 8B Final Site Plan: 48. [General Comment] Please add a legend to the plans identifying all line types, abbreviations, and other symbology used on the drawings. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 49. [General Comment] On Sheet 3, please add the approved final site plan application number for Block 4 parcel/area. This site plan is SDP201800050 and it was approved on December 17, 2018. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 50. IZMA2015000071 Per Table 12 on page 30 of the Code of Development, the driveway parking spaces proposed throughout the development do not meet the minimum 9' width required. See note 5 from Figure 12. Please revise the widths of driveway parking spaces accordingly. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. a. Per Table 12 on page 30 of the Code of Development, the driveway parking spaces proposed throughout the development do not meet the required minimum 18' depth from the rear property line. Parcel boundaries shown at the rear of each lot have parking spaces measured at 14.' Please revise. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 51. [General Comment] Please update all sheets that show existing easements visible within the extent of these plans. Existing easements should be labeled with the recorded instrument number for the plat and any applicable easement deeds of dedication which were recorded separately. This includes the easements created and recorded in the following instruments: a. Public Storm Drain Easements, Public SWM Facility Easements, 30' Private Landscape Buffer Easement - DB 5121, pages 644-675. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. b. Private Landscape Buffer Easement Deed of Dedication - DB 5121, pages 689-701. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. c. Public SWM Facility Easements Deed of Dedication — DB 5121, pages 676-688. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 52. [General Comment] Please clearly delineate all proposed parcel boundaries. Rev. 2: Comment stands. Once SUB201900117 and SUB201900123 are approved and recorded, all parcel lines within the boundaries of the Block 8B site plan should be updated to match the recorded plats. Labels should include new/revised TMP numbers, acreages, and recorded instrument number. 53. [General Comment] A new easement plat will need to be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded for all proposed easements within Block 8B. Plans will need to be revised accordingly to reflect the instrument numbers for future easement plats associated with this development. Rev. 2: Comment stands. 54. IZMA2015000071 See Engineering Division comments. Some retaining walls exceed the maximum 600' length allowed by the COD. Please revise the plans as necessary. If walls cannot be shortened, a variation to the COD will be needed prior to final site plan approval. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 55. [General Comment] Please provide acreages of each buffer area proposed in Block 8B. This includes the acreage of the buffer around Block 19, and the segment of the 30' polo grounds road buffer at the south end of Block 8B. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 56. [ZMA201500007] The site plans shows that the segment of the 30' Polo Grounds Road buffer within Block 813 is not currently wooded and the existing tree line does not extend into the buffer. Per the COD, the buffer needs to be replanted with a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning. Rev. 2: Comment not fullv addressed. There is still a 240' segment of the buffer that does not contain existing trees. The landscape plans do not show new plantings in this portion of the buffer. Please revise the plans accordingly to comply with the COD. a. Please revise the landscape plans to show installation of new landscaping within the buffer. Rev. 2: Please add additional plantings where missing in the buffer. b. Update the tables on the landscape plans to show the types, sizes, and quantities of each vegetation type proposed within the buffer. Rev. 2: Comment stands, update as necessary once landscape plans are revised. c. The calculations for proposed overall tree canopy will also need to be revised once this landscaping material is added to the plans. Rev. 2: Comment stands, update as necessary once landscape plans are revised. 57. [ZMA201500007] Please revise existing conditions where "Proposed Route 29 and Polo Grounds Road Buffer Area" is labeled. The buffer easements created by the plat recorded in DB 5121, pages 644-675 already exist and their areas should be classified as "buffer" acreage in the Block Area Summary table. All other open space areas should be classified as "Open Space" in the Block Area Summary table. a. Please revise the lines of the Proposed Route 29 and Polo Grounds Road Buffer Area so that the existing buffer easements are shown as separate items, and the remaining open space is labeled as "Open Space" with an acreage figure. Rev. 2: Once the exhibit is provided as requested in comment #59, staff will verify that the buffers, open space, and future greenway areas within Block 813 comply with COD requirements and the Application Plan. b. Revise the Block Area Summary table as necessary. Rev. 2: Once the exhibit is provided as requested in comment #59, staff will verify that the buffers, open space, and future greenway areas within Block 813 comply with COD requirements and the Application Plan. 58. [General Comment] On Sheet 1, the "Open Space Provided" line states that 13.217 acres is being provided in Block 8B. Is this supposed to state "Total Greenspace Provided?" The acreages do not match the table on Sheet 3. As a reminder, "Greenspace" is the term used by the COD for all buffers, civic/parks, greenways, and open space areas provided within the development. Please revise the wording as necessary. a. Make sure the acreage figures states on sheet 1 match the table on Sheet 3. Sheet 3 states that Based on the acreages listed in the Sheet 3 table, it appears that 15.127 total acres of Greenspace will be provided with Block 8B. 59. [ZMA201500007] Per Section 2.4 (page 18) of the COD, all of the required greenspace areas in Brookhill "Shall be located outside of private lots and right-of-way. All of the Greenspace within Brookhill, with the exception of the greenway, will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association." Since the time of the Block 8B initial site plan approval, it has been determined that this means that any land being used to count toward meeting the minimum required open space, buffer, and parks/civic space acreages needs to be subdivided as separate parcels and ownership transferred to the HOA. a. The open space areas and buffers shown on the final site plan will need to be platted as separate lots that will be transferred to the HOA. Please submit a subdivision plat to create these parcels. This includes proposed open space that will be located on the opposite side of Archer Avenue near the future Greenway area in Block 8 (currently being counted as part of Block 813). b. HOA covenants will need to be established at this point. These covenants will need to be submitted with the subdivision plat and reviewed by the County for compliance with the COD of ZMA201500007 and proffers of ZMA201800011. c. The 0.20 acre courtyard in Block 813 should not be counted toward meeting the minimum open space requirements of the COD. The internal travel ways serving the multifamily units would cross into the open space parcel of Block 8B. Therefore, the table on Sheet 3 will need to be updated so that the 0.20 acre courtyard is not counted in the "Open Space Proposed" column. d. The Open Space Provided line on Sheet 1 will need to be update so that the acreage stated does not count the 0.20 acre courtyard. e. Since the time of the initial site plan approval, it appears that the developer has decided to count the future Greenway Area and open space areas on the west side of Archer Avenue as part of Block 813's development. Please provide a drawing in the final site plan that shows the proposed open space, and proposed greenway areas. As a reminder of Section 2.4.1 of the COD (page 18), the Greenway "encompasses the land within the 100 foot stream buffer along the perennial streams and wetlands and all land located within the floodplain." Currently, this portion of Block 813 is not shown on the Layout plans (Sheets 3 and 4) of the final site plan. The site plan should label the environmental features that are classified as parts of the Greenway. The greenway can be labeled "Future Greenway to be dedicated to Albemarle County per ZMA201800011 proffers." 60. [ZMA201800011] The Brookhill proffer amendment ZMA, ZMA201800011, was approved by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on July 17, 2019. These proffers replaced those from ZMA201500007. a. On Sheet 1, please state the correct ZMA number and Board approval date for the proffers in the Zoning note. b. On sheets 1A/1B please replace the ZMA20150007 proffer list with the approved proffers from ZMA201800011. c. The Code of Development and Application Plan from ZMA201500007 are still valid and apply to the Brookhill project. State this in the Zoning note on Sheet 1. 61. [General Comment] Since time of initial site plan approval, Block 8B is now being proposed as a multifamily development. On all applicable drawings, remove labels calling out "Limits of Public R/W" for Wesley Circle. Remove the labels over top of proposed buildings that mention lot numbers — all proposed structures will be located within the same TMP. 9 Please contact Cameron Langille at the Department of Community Development at blan ille =,albemarle.org or 296- 5832 ext. 3432 for further information. Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — Emily Cox, ecoxkalbemarle.oriz— Requested Changes, see attached. Albemarle County Building Inspections — Michael Dellinger, mdellingergalbemarle.org —No objection. Albemarle County Planning Services (Architectural Review Board) — Margaret Maliszewski, mmaliszewski(a�albemarle.org — Requested Changes, see attached. Albemarle County Service Authority Richard Nelson, rnelson&serviceauthorit�org — Requested changes, see attached. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — Shawn Maddox, smaddoxgalbemarle.org — Requested Changes, see attached. Virginia Department of Transportation — Adam Moore, Adam.Moore(c�r�,vdot.vir ig nia.gov — Requested changes, see attached. 10 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Cameron Langille From: Emily Cox Date: 17 April 2019 Rev. 1 Date: 21 Aug 2019 Subject: Brookhill Block 8B - FSP (SDP201900015) The final site plan for Brookhill Block 8B has been reviewed by Engineering. The following comments will need to be addressed before approval: 1. WPO plan must be approved before final site plan can be approved. Rev. 1: WP0201800080 must be approved before final site plan can be approved. 2. Road Plan must be approved before final site plan can be approved. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Roadways are no longer proposed. Travelways are being used. 3. Final design of retaining walls must be provided before final site plan can be approved. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. 4. Per the code of development Section 2.7, approval must be obtained to have retaining walls over 600 ft in length. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 5. Please remove road profiles and detail sheets. Those should be submitted with the road plans. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 6. Please remove existing 100' WPO buffer labels. It is a proposed greenway per the approved ZMA. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 7. Provide note explaining that existing conditions are based on approved plans and may not match the current, existing topography/layout on site. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 8. Ensure road plans are revised to match this plan. Note says entrance and right-of- way to be removed in certain areas. Rev. 1: Please note that SUB201700117 Amendment 1 has not been approved. 9. Slopes steeper than 3:1 must specify landscaping that can withstand steep slopes. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 10. How will the buffer along Polo Grounds Road be planted? There are 2:1 slopes adjacent to stella lane and there is a SWM facility. Rev. 1: The 30' Polo Ground buffer is to be planted with a mixture of deciduous and evergreen shrubs and trees. It cannot be steep slope grass mix. 11. Do sidewalks outside of the right-of-way have easements or maintenance agreements? Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 12. Sidewalks abutting parking should be 6' wide.(near Wesley and Noush Court abutting the courtyard). Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 13. Please specify where roof drains will tie-in. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Only one roof drain was shown for each group of buildings. Provide exhibit showing the pitches of the rooftops and how only one drain is necessary. 14. Sheet 5 labels a ditch behind the retaining wall. Please provide design for this ditch.Rev. Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 2 1: Comment addressed. 15. 12" pipes between yard inlets have very steep slope, almost 20%. Provide information showing this slope is allowable. Will they be anchored? Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 16. What is the plan/detail for the driveway aprons? Rev. 1: Comment addressed 17. Rev. 1: There is a note on sheet 5 that says limits of public R/W. Please remove this note. 18. Rev. 1: Where "step down" manholes are used, the Drainage Designer should provide any needed protection to prevent deterioration of the bottom of the manhole. This protection can be provided by the addition of a 1/Z inch steel plate in the bottom of the manhole. Cameron Langille From: Heather McMahon Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 2:02 PM To: Cameron Langille Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP201900015 BROOKHILL - BLOCK 8B - FINAL. The Review for the following application has been completed: Application Number = SDP201900015 Reviewer = Heather McMahon Review Status = See Recommendations Completed Date = 07/29/2019 This email was sent from County View Production. Comments in County View as follows: A Certificate of Appropriateness if required prior to Final Site Plan approval. The applicant must submit an ARB application and associated fee for Final Site Plan review. As a courtesy, I have provided the comments provided of the Initial Site Plan Review below: This item was placed on the CONSENT AGENDA of the 8-20-18 ARB meeting. Motion to Approve Consent Agenda: Motion: Mr. Binsted moved to approve the consent agenda and forward the recommendations outlined in the staff reports for the Initial Site Plans to the Agent for the Site Review Committee, as follows. ARB-2018-102: Brookhill Block 8B — Initial Site Development Plan (TM/Parcel 04600000001800) Proposal: To develop Block 8B with 55 lots for multi -family attached dwellings (110 units grouped into 11 buildings) and associated improvements on a 7.18-acre, L-shaped site. Location: East side of Seminole Trail (Rt. 29 N) and north side of Polo Grounds Road (Rt. 643). Forest Lakes Community is to the north and Montgomery Ridge is to the east. Regarding requirements to satisfy the design guidelines as per § 18-30.6.4c(2), (3) and (5) and recommended conditions of initial plan approval: 1. None. Note that a Certificate of Appropriateness is required prior to final site plan approval. • Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the guidelines: None. • Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit: None. • Regarding the final site plan submittal: 1. Architecture and landscaping will be reviewed with a future submittal. A Certificate of Appropriateness is required prior to final site plan approval. 2. Provide site sections of Block 8B from the EC to determine visibility of the proposed buildings and site structures. 3. Submit material and color samples, dimensioned elevations of the fagades, and floor plans of the attached multi -family buildings on lots 1-15 and 38-55 for review. 4. Provide the standard window glass note on the architectural elevations submitted for review: Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%. 5. Provide a roof plan and architectural elevations that show the placement and proposed heights of mechanical units, if roof -mounted mechanical equipment is proposed. Show how all visibility of mechanical equipment from the EC will be eliminated. 6. If above -ground utilities are proposed, provide these and their easements on revised site plans. 7. Include the mechanical equipment note on the revised site plans and architectural drawings: Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated. 8. Provide in the site plan sufficient details to show that all proposed light fixtures meet the requirements of the lighting ordinance. 9. Provide a landscape plan for review at a scale of 1" = 30'. Include utilities and their easements on the plan, as well as a plant schedule. 10. Provide street trees on the east and south sides of Road E/Wesley Circle. 11. Provide shade trees on the eastern edge of the site around the four parking spaces. 12. Provide the standard plant health note on all landscape plans submitted for review: All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant. N Cameron Langille From: Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 3:10 PM To: Cameron Langille Subject: SDP201900015 Brookhill Block 8B Final Site Plan Cameron, SDP201900015 Brookhill Block 8B Final Site Plan is currently under review. Thanks, Richard Nelson Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (434) 977-4511 Review Comments for SDP201900015 lFinal Site Development Plan Project Name: BROOHILL - BLOCK 8B - FINAL Date Completed: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: Shawn Maddox Fire Rescue I Requested Changes There appear to be fire lines extending to the structures_ If the buildings are going to be sprinklered then FDO's must be shown } on the site plan and must have a hydrant within 100' of each FQO_ If sprinklered the buildings must also have a Knox Box - add a note that indicates the requirement and that the location can be coordinated with the fire marshal's office_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10910412019 Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Ccuirrh5sioner COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper Virginia 22701 August 16, 2019 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Cameron Langille Re: Brookhill Block 8B — Final Site Plan SDP-2019-00015 Review #2 Dear Mr. Langille: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated l I March 2019, revised 22 July 2019, and offers the following comments: 1. Please provide turn lane warrants for the connection of the private Wesley Circle travel way and the public Stella lane. If further information is desired, please contact Willis Bedsaul at 434-422-9866. 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. aMore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING ORDINANCE NO. 16-A(9) ZMA 2015-00007 BROOKHILL AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 277.5 ACRES FROM Rl-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO NEIGHBORHOOD MODEL DISTRICT (NMD) FOR TAX MAP PARCEL NUMBERS 04600-00-00-01800, 04600-00-00-018A0, AND 04600-00-00-01900 WHEREAS, the application to rezone 277.5 acres from R1-Residential District to Neighborhood Model District (NMD) for Tax Map Parcel Numbers 04600-00-00-01800, 04600-00-00-018A0, and 04600-00-00-01900 (the "Property") is identified as ZMA 2015-00007, Brookhill ("ZMA 2015-07"); and WHEREAS, staff recommended approval of ZMA 2015-07 provided that minor revisions were made to the proffers, the application plan, and the code of development, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on ZMA 2015-07 on August 16, 2016, and recommended approval conditioned on the applicant making the staff -recommended revisions, as well as an additional revision, and such revisions have since been made. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that upon consideration of the staff report prepared for ZMA 2015-00007 and its attachments, including the proffers dated October 13, 2016 and signed on October 21, 2016, the information presented at the public hearing, the material and relevant factors in Virginia Code § 15.2-2284, and for the purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practices, the Board hereby approves ZMA 2015-00007 with the proffers dated October 13, 2016 and signed on October 21, 2016, the Application Plan dated June 15, 2015 and last revised September 16, 2016, and the Code of Development dated June 15, 2016 and last revised October 13, 2016 I, Claudette K. Borgersen, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of five to zero, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on November 9, 2016 Aye Nay Mr Dill Y _ Ms. Mallek Y _ Ms. McKeel Y Ms. Palmer Y Mr Randolph Y Mr Sheffield Absent RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO SIGN AN APPLICATION, SUBDIVISION PLAT, AND RELATED DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO TAX MAP PARCEL 046115-00-00-OO1C0 WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is the owner of Tax Map Parcel 046B5-00-00- 001CO3 a piece of land located at the intersection of U.S Route 29 North and Ashwood Boulevard (the "County Parcel"), and WHEREAS, the Places 29 Master Plan depicts a road through the County Parcel providing a connection between the lands to its south being considered for rezoning under Zoning Map Amendment 2015-00007, Brookhill ("ZMA 2015-07" and "Brookhill"), and WHEREAS, pursuant to Proffer 1(C) of the proffers offered in conjunction with ZMA 2015-07, the owners would construct a public street that is referred to therein as the Ashwood Boulevard Connection across the County Parcel, and WHEREAS, in order to create the public right-of-way on which the Ashwood Boulevard Connection would be constructed, the County Parcel must be subdivided, and WHEREAS, when its construction is completed, the Ashwood Boulevard Connection will benefit the County and its residents by providing an important multi -modal interconnection. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED, that, if the Board of Supervisors adopts an ordinance approving ZMA 2015-07, the Board authorizes the County Executive to sign on behalf of the County of Albemarle any application, subdivision plat, easement plat, deed of easement granting a temporary construction easement, and any other related document required in order to subdivide the County Parcel to create the separate parcel on which the public right-of-way for the Ashwood Boulevard Connection may be constructed. I, Claudette K. Borgersen, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true and correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of five to zero, as recorded below, at a meeting held on November 9, 2016 Clerk, Board of County rvisors Nay Mr Dill Y _ Ms. Mallek Y Ms. McKeel Y _ Ms. Palmer Y Mr Randolph Y _ Mr Sheffield Absent RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SP 2015-25 BROOKHILL WHEREAS, the Owners of Tax Map Parcels 04600-00-00-01800 and 04600-00-00-018AO (collectively, the "Property") filed an application for a special use permit to permit grading activities within the floodplam that would expand the floodplam limits, and the replacements of culverts within the floodplain, on the property, and the application is identified as Special Use Permit 2015-00025 Brookhill (SP 2015-25"); and WHEREAS, on August 16, 2016, after a duly noticed public hearing, the Albemarle County Planning Commission recommended approval of SP 2015-25 with staff -recommended conditions; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 2016, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors held a duly noticed public hearing on SP 2015-25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the staff report prepared for SP 2015-25 and all of its attachments, the information presented at the public hearing, and the factors relevant to a special use permit in Albemarle County Code §§ 18-30.3 11 and 18-33 8, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby approves SP 2015-25, subject to the conditions attached hereto 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 five to zero, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on November 9, 2016 L.CLtt,1GYt��ato Clerk, Board Board of County ervisors Ave Nay Mr Dill Y Ms. Mallek Y Ms. McKeel Y Ms. Palmer Y Mr Randolph Y Mr Sheffield Absent SP-2015-00025 Brookhill Conditions 1 Prior to final road plan approval or permitting of a land disturbance in the floodplam, the applicant shall obtain from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) a Conditional Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (CLOMR-F), and prior to road acceptance, the applicant shall obtain from FEMA a Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F). In addition, the applicant shall copy the County Engineer on all correspondence with FEMA. Construction of the road shall be in compliance with approved road plans and the FEMA approved CLOMR-F 2 Any residential or commercial lots and associated streets (public or private) resulting from the subdivision of the Property, with the exception of the stream crossings, shall be located outside of the 100 foot stream buffer (as shown on the Brookhill Special Use Permit & CLOMR Plan, Existing Conditions, Sheet 2, last revised 6/15/16), the Flood Hazard Overlay District, and preserved slopes on the property Approval of lots located within the stream buffer shall be subject to Subdivision Agent approval.