Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800074 Review Comments 2018-11-15 Christopher Perez From: Maryam T. <maryamt_@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 12:04 PM To: Christopher Perez; Scott Collins Cc: Rick Randolph; Pam Riley; Vito Cetta; Jeremy W. Swink Subject: Re: SDP201800074 Avon Park II—Initial Site Plan & SUB201800178 Avon Park II— Preliminary Subdivision Plat Christopher, My apologies for not being able to make it to the meeting this morning due to the school closures. Per my earlier email, I would like to speak with you today or tomorrow regarding some concerns that the Avon Park HOA has with respect to the recommendations and the overall plan, as some have adverse impacts on my community. Below are some of our concerns that I would like to discuss with you: [ZMA2014-6, 33.15] Amendments to Existing Proffers. A proffer amendment is needed for proffer 3 and proffer 10. Proffer 3 - The lot layout of the proposed development no longer correlates to the proffer language for the timing of required plantings in various landscape easements, which are tied to certificate of occupancies (COs) for various lots/units. • The Avon Park HOA, along with the neighbors who are impacted by this development, request that concrete timelines be included on when the required plantings in the various landscaping easements are to be planted. It is very important to us to have the proper privacy in place as soon as possible and we are not comfortable with the uncertainty on when this will take place. • Please also note: Per our discussions with Jeremy Swink, we noted that our initial landscaping recommendations (for the landscaping privacy barrier) between Avon Park I and Avon Park II was based on there being shorter single family homes behind my community. Since the Townhomes are taller, we are requesting a change to the our previously proposed landscaping plantings. Jeremy mentioned how this could be worked with them separately, however, we would like some language in the document indicating that we would like the plantings changed due to the new design of the Avon Park II development. Defer to you Christopher on how we can best go about this. Proffer 10 -The lot layout of the proposed development no longer correlates to the proffer language for the location of the required scrim fence. • We have significant concerns with the developer NOT including a scrim fence along the Avon Park 1/Avon Park 2 property line. Without the scrim fence, the neighbors who are impacted by this development will be unfairly burdened by dust, noise, and the unsightly nature of the construction process. We also have some owners who are looking to sell their property and absent a scrim fence, it would have adverse effects on their property values. Most developments throughout our County do utilize a scrim fence when construction is occurring between two communities. Therefore, there should not be any exceptions made for my community. My community feels very strongly about this issue and we would like to have the scrim fence be put back in. [ZMA2014-6] Proffer 6. The final site plan shall identify the location of trees at the rear of TMP 90E-A2, TMP 90E-F-42, TMP 90E-F-43, and TMP 90E-F-44. If trees are located within 5' or less of the property line, the owner will remove the trees on the adjacent properties. Tree removal will be subject to the existing property owner's written approval. • We would like clarification on this. Per our discussions with Jeremy, he had mentioned that Stanley Martin would try to preserve as much trees as possible on the Avon Park II side. The language, as written above, suggestions that potentially ALL trees within the 5' or less of the property line will be removed. Can Jeremy or Scott please clarify whether all or some of the trees will be removed? • For additional clarification, will there be a temporary easement required behind 1964-1968 Tudor Court for the removal of the trees as referenced above? Based on our understanding, the temporary easement for the removal of trees exist only behind 1147-1165 Arden Drive. [4.20] Parking. The development is permitted a maximum of 81 parking spaces to meet the 20% maximum parking threshold. Currently the proposal is over this maximum. Please remove 3 parking spaces. • We are concerned about the County's request to remove 3 parking spaces from the plan. While the County may believe that there are sufficient parking spaces, the development as a whole is small, and any additional parking spaces needed (especially during holidays and weekends) will spill over to the Avon Park I side. The Avon Park I community currently does not have sufficient parking to support our own community and any overflow of parking from Avon II will significantly impact us. We strongly request that the County not mandate the removal of these parking spaces due to the potential adverse impact on Avon Park I. [ZMA2014-6, 8.5.5.3(a), 33.44, 4.19] Special Exception for a Variation to the Application Plan - Setbacks. • We look forward to seeing the final numbers on the setbacks as well, as it was our understanding that they would be at 15'throughout. [ZMA2014-6, 8.5.5.3(a)2] Waterline Access for Adjacent Lots. Provide a 20' waterline easement to the northern property line and to the southern property line along Stratford Places. Additionally, provide a waterline easement that extends to TMP 90-30B. These easements shall be platted prior to final site plan approval. Note: There is also a reference by ACSA indicating "...waster pressure in this area may be low due to the location in proximity to the tank." • Question: Is the plan for the Avon Park II development to tie into the water tower system that is currently in place on Avon I? If so, we would like to note that our water pressure throughout the community is extremely low and we have reached out to the AC Water Authority on numerous occasions reference this issue and we were told that there is nothing that can be done about our concerns. If another development ties into this water system, the Avon Park I community will see even 2 • more decrease in our water pressure, which puts an unfair burden on my community. Can the County please elaborate on how the water pressure issue will the handled? 1 Thank you for your time and I look forward to discussing these issues with you. Maryam Tatavosian President, Avon Park HOA From: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Sent:Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:05 PM To:Scott Collins Cc: maryamt_@hotmail.com; Rick Randolph; Pam Riley;Vito Cetta; quietlife242@gmail.com; taradecardenas@gmail.com;Jeremy W.Swink Subject:SDP201800074 Avon Park II—Initial Site Plan &SUB201800178 Avon Park II—Preliminary Subdivision Plat Scott, SDP201800074 Avon Park II—Initial Site Plan SUB201800178 Avon Park II—Preliminary Subdivision Plat Attached are SRC review comments for the above ref project. Reminder, site review is tomorrow. Christopher Perez 1 Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road 1 Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 3