HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201900016 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2020-01-03 (2)�pF AL
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176
January 3, 2020
Chris Fuller
92 Oak Forest Circle
Charlottesville, VA 22901
chris(athehousin lag b.org / (248) 535-6088
RE: Review Comment Letter #1: ZMA-2019-00016 2231 Bamboo Grove
Mr. Fuller:
Staff has reviewed your initial submittal for the zoning map amendment, ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove. We have
questions and comments which we believe should be addressed before we can recommend favorably on your ZMA
request. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Our comments are provided below:
General Application Comments:
1. Project narrative:
i. The narrative states that two units of affordable housing and a greenway dedication will be proffered.
However, no draft proffer statement has been submitted for review. A proffer statement conforming with
the County Attorney's office template for proffer statements needs to be prepared and submitted in order
for any official proffers to be proposed. A copy of the template has been attached and can be edited as
necessary.
ii. The proffer related to the greenway dedication should include stipulations regarding the timing for
dedication of the proposed greenway area.
iii. The proffer related to affordable housing should incorporate the information and parameters specified by
the County's housing planner, Stacy Pethia. See the attached comments from Ms. Pethia for additional
information.
iv. Please consider adding a proffer that restricts the types of uses that can occur on the property. Since the
concept plan isn't being proffered, the potential to do any of the by -right uses under Section 15.2.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance will be possible if the ZMA gets approved. Since the applicant knows that they want to
do a single-family detached bonus level cluster development, a proffer should be provided stating which
use types under Section 15.2.1 will be allowed and which will be restricted. This will provide a level of
certainty to staff, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors about what the actual
development will end up being should the ZMA be approved. Please contact Planning staff if you wish to
receive more guidance on how to word/write the language for this proffer.
V. See comment #6 under the "Concept Plan" section of this letter and comments from the transportation
planning reviewer, Dan Butch. If a proffer statement is provided, please include a proffer stating that a
new sidewalk within the public right of way of Orchard Drive will be provided along the entire property
frontage along Orchard Drive at time of development.
2. Staff has evaluated the density calculation shown throughout the application and has noted the note under
Proposed Development Summary (Zoning) on Sheet 2 of the concept plan. Please be aware that since staff must
evaluate proposed rezoning's for consistency with the net density recommendations specified in the
Comprehensive Plan and Master Plans, the proposed 9 du/acre will be noted as a factor unfavorable with this
application in future staff reports for public hearings. This is because the maximum recommended density
specified by the Crozet master Plan is 6 du/acre net density.
3. Please be aware of the issue related to the parking special exception requests as outlined in the Zoning Division
comments. Revisions to the site layout may be necessary in order to provide the minimum amount of required
parking. Pending applicant response to the Zoning Division's comments on these exceptions, additional
comments from Planning may be forthcoming.
Concept Plan Comments:
1. Based on the statement on Sheet 2 of the application, the conceptual drawings provided are for reference only as
an example of how the site could be developed in the future. This layout is not being proffered. Please verify. If
the applicant chooses to not proffer the plan, development of the site will be held to the location of major
elements as shown, per Section 33.17 of the Zoning Ordinance. See Zoning Division comment #4 for more
information.
a. Should the applicant choose to proffer the plan, a proffer statement will need to be provided that includes
a proffer outlining what elements/major elements of the plan are being proffered.
2. Please explain the "connection if approved" trail that is shown connecting southward to TMP 55-68A. Does this
mean a connection will be made if approved by the County with this ZMA? That property is under separate
ownership and potential improvements that may be made between that property and Bamboo Grove need to be
worked out by both property owners privately. Staff does not feel comfortable having the connection shown on
the concept plan since that property owner did not sign the ZMA application. Staff suggests removing the
connection from the drawing. A connection can still be made in the future during site plan/subdivision plat
review phases of the project, subject to an agreement between the property owners and a potential easement for
the trail connection.
3. Please provide clearer identification of the boundaries of the proposed greenway trail dedication area, and the
remaining open space that will be privately maintained (Open Space 1 and Open Space 2) on Sheet 2 of the
concept plan. It is difficult to differentiate where the boundaries of these features begin and end. For example, is
the entire Open Space I area going to be dedicated to the County for public use, or only a portion of it?
a. In the labels on Sheet 2, please state the square footage/acreage of Open Space 1 and 2 so that staff can
verify it matches the sizes listed in the Open Space calculation notes.
4. Under Existing Zoning Summary on Sheet 2 of the concept plan and page 5 of the project narrative, the
calculation for Comprehensive Plan Net Density needs to be revised. The Comp. Plan states a density range of
between 3-6 dwelling units per acre. Please state the minimum and maximum dwelling units range permitted
based on the Comprehensive Plan future land use designation. The calculation currently only states the high end.
5. Please provide more details on how the 0.67 acre net residential area available within the site was determined.
a. Based on a staff measurement using Albemarle County GIS of the WPO stream buffer and Greenspace
future land use designation on the properties, these features measure approximately 0.65 acres. Has a
survey been done to determine the true extent of the stream buffer, and that is the 0.67 acres stated on the
plans?
6. Under "Proposed Development Summary (Zoning)" and "Lot Sizes" on Sheet 2 of the concept plan and page 5 of
the project narrative, please state "per Section 15.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance.
7. Under "Zoning Bonus and Cluster Factors" on Sheet 2 of the concept plan and page 5 of the project narrative,
please revise the final calculation. As specified in Section 15.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, the maximum gross
density of dwelling units for a Bonus level Cluster Development in the R4 District is 6 du/acre. The total possible
number of units on this site with the proposed bonus factors, should it be rezoned to R4 Residential, is 5.8
dwelling units, not 7. See Zoning Division comment #2 for more information.
8. Upon evaluation of the proposal, a revised pedestrian network would make this request more consistent with the
Crozet Master Plan's recommendations for street cross -sections in this area. Specifically, the new sidewalk along
the proposed private street should be extended all the way to the Orchard Drive right-of-way (ROW). It should
also be provided along the entire length of the property frontage within the ROW of Orchard Drive.
a. The new trail should connect to the sidewalk within the Orchard Drive ROW at the north end of the site.
b. Due to the requests for special exceptions related to parking, there may be a higher number of residents
within the proposed development seeking to use pedestrian modes of travel instead of personal vehicles.
Please explain why the concept plan does not show the sidewalk connection extending south to connect to
the existing sidewalk within the ROW of Orchard Drive — it seems like this could be done without having
to obtain permission from the neighboring property owner for a sidewalk connection.
Special Exception for Offsite Parking
Please see comments from the Zoning Division on this request. This development will require 12 total parking spaces
based on the 6 dwelling units proposed. A waiver to reduce the minimum number of parking spaces cannot be approved
for residential development, per Section 4.12.2 (c). A minimum of 12 spaces (two per lot) must be provided.
Stand-alone parking is not a permitted use under Section 15.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Zoning staff believe that street
parking, in accordance with Section 4.12.9, is the only possible alternative that could be provided with this development
that will enable 12 parking spaces to be provided.
The concept plan should be revised to demonstrate that the minimum number of spaces (12 overall) can be provided in
locations consistent with the Zoning Ordinance (either two per lot within proposed parcel boundaries, or a combination of
spaces on individual lots and some on -street parking) to the satisfaction of Zoning staff.
Private Street Authorization Request
Due to the response needed for the requested parking waiver, staff cannot make a definitive statement about whether the
private street authorization request can be supported. If on -street parking will be provided in order obtain the minimum
amount of parking needed for the six detached single-family dwelling units, staff would need to see and review the
updated street design before making a determination on this request. Please address the parking issues in the next
submittal, and staff will revisit the private street authorization request.
Special Exceptions to Private Street Design Standards
There are three special exceptions being requested related to the design of the proposed private street:
Section 14-410 (I) — Variation to curb and gutter along north side of proposed private street;
Section 14-422 (E) — Variation to sidewalk requirement along north side of proposed private street;
Section 14-422 (F) — Variation to planting strip design along north side of proposed private street.
Due to the response needed for the requested parking waiver, staff cannot make a definitive statement about whether the
requested variations can be supported. If on -street parking will be provided in order obtain the minimum amount of
parking needed for the six detached single-family dwelling units, staff would need to see and review the updated street
design before making a determination on this request. Please address the parking issues in the next submittal, and staff
will revisit the requested special exceptions.
One comment that can be identified relates to the planting strip design — in effect, the request implies that a planting strip
will be provided along the north side of the road with the stormwater management devices/bioswales. Can the applicant
verify that an area at least 6' wide can be located between the street pavement and the bioswales? If so, please revise the
justification statement for the variation request so that it states that an area 6' wide can be provided along the north side of
the street, which is consistent with the planting strip design requirements specified in Section 14-422 (D).
Planning
Planning staff s comments are organized as follows:
• How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan
• The Neighborhood Model analysis
• Additional comments from reviewers (See attached)
Comprehensive Plan
Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan will be provided to the Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The comments
below are in preparation for the Planning Commission review and may change based on direction from the Commission
and/or with subsequent submittals.
¢ 1213
N55G--OA-6 pamei ww
n 558-0'A-5 55C--OA-4 55G-03--A1
SSC-•DA•2 ''� 0 Parcekc
carp Plan Land use Ind.
Grezel Master Plan LaM flee
,3 •.•. ■ Greenspace'
, Neighborhood D—My Ravdeltal L
1209 • urban OenWli Bide aal ,aenxai
• Mixeausa
■ oewrrcnWa
■ wsnationel
tipn Ind„l
SSC--OA-1 58-115 ■ sea cr�ar Ma:terPlan re.�
1205
5986 55-67A
55-68C
56-9
55-60 ❑
55-67C
55 69A
1193
5974 5964
2192 p
r �
2190
55-fi86
130fi
ens-w.e
55-70 55-70B1 55.706 55C-01--1 55C-01--3 gw.arnk ox. s...a.
55.70G2.,.,'rap
�asa� as�e�
The subject parcels are identified as Tax Map Parcels (TMP) 05500-00-00-068CO and 05500-00-00-068D0. Both
properties are located in the Crozet development area.
TMP 55-68C measures 0.8810 acres and is zoned R2 Residential. There are no zoning overlay districts that apply to the
property. The property is undeveloped and features a mix of mature trees and other vegetation.
TMP 55-68D measures 0.3560 acres and is zoned R2 Residential. There are no zoning overlay districts that apply to the
property. The property is undeveloped and is primarily grass with a few trees spread across the parcel.
The Land Use Plan contained in Chapter 4 of the Crozet Master Plan designates two future land use classifications on
portions of both parcels:
1. Neighborhood Density;
2. Greenspace.
The Crozet Master Plan explains that the Neighborhood Density classification represents "residential areas with a
desired density of 3 — 6 residential units per acre."
• Housing in this designation should primarily be single-family detached with some single-family
attached/townhouses.
• Non-residential uses include institutional uses, such as places of worship, public and private schools, and early
childhood education centers (daycare centers and preschools).
The Greenspace classification applies to all existing and proposed public parks, public open space, environmental
features and active park areas. It also contains important environmental features and privately -owned park and
recreational areas which may be active or passive. Sensitive environmental features including stream buffers, flood plains,
and adjacent slopes are included in this category. Typically, only passive recreation and greenway trails will occur in the
sensitive environmental areas, while active recreation is planned for other areas.
In addition to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, please also be advised that all zoning map amendment
applications are evaluated relative to the "factors to be considered" specified in County Code § 18-33.27(B). This
evaluation will be written in the staff report to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors once the application
moved forward to public hearings.
Neighborhood Model
Projects located within the Development Areas are typically reviewed for consistency with each of the Neighborhood
Model Principles found in the Comprehensive Plan. Comments are provided below on relevant aspects of the
Neighborhood Model. More detailed comments may be provided after more detailed plans are provided.
Pedestrian Orientation
This principle is partially met but could be strengthened. The conceptual site plan is not
being proffered and this is the only part of the application that shows the layout for the
proposed public trail within the site. Please provide additional information on this —
will a public greenway/trail access easement be platted over the general trail route as
shown on the concept plans? Will the 0.28 acres being dedicated to the County include
the entire length of the trail as shown on the concept plan?
Furthermore, the application should provide a new sidewalk within the Orchard Drive
right-of-way along the entire property frontage. See transportation planning staff
comments for more information. Please revise the concept plan to reflect this.
The proposed trail should connect to the new sidewalk within the Orchard Drive ROW.
See transportation planning staff's comments for more information. Please revise the
concept plan to reflect this.
Mixture of Uses
This principle is met. The properties are not located within a proposed land use center
of the Crozet Master Plan, so commercial use types are not appropriate on this site.
The proposal includes new residential dwelling units as well as a public trail/greenway
dedication. This mixture of residential and recreational/open space satisfies this
principle.
Neighborhood Centers
This principle is not applicable to the request. The Crozet Master Plan does not call for
any land use centers near the subject parcel.
Mixture of Housing Types
This principle is primarily met but could be strengthened.
and Affordability
The project proposes three different dwelling unit types, identified by the project
narrative as "A," "B," and "C." Staff supports this variation in size and price of new
units and believes this represents a sufficient mix of unit types. Additionally, the
proposal has managed to stay consistent with the Crozet Master Plan recommendation
that new residential development adjacent to existing neighborhoods should be
compatible in housing types. Parcels immediately adjacent to the site feature single-
family detached dwellings, which is what the Bamboo Grove ZMA is proposing.
As noted in the project narrative, the applicant is proposing to proffer affordable units.
However, no proffer statement was provided with the first submission. Please provide a
proffer statement so staff can review the proposed affordable unit proffer.
Relegated Parking
This principle is partially met. A remote parking area is shown adjacent to the proposed
new street, with buildings in front of it and partially blocking its view from Orchard
Drive. However, comments from the Zoning Division related to the requested special
exceptions for parking have raised several concerns. See Zoning Division comments
for more information. Depending on how the site layout is revised to address Zoning
staff concerns, parking areas may become visible from Orchard Drive, which would be
inconsistent with this principle unless the application meets some if the strategies
specified in the Comprehensive Plan related to this principle. For example, if parking
spaces will be provided on individual lots, the plan could be revised to state that
dwelling units will have relegated garages. See the images of relegated garages in the
Comprehensive Plan for reference.
Interconnected Streets and
This principle is primarily met but could be strengthened through revisions.
Transportation Networks
No new streets are called for within the subject parcels by the Transportation Plan in
the Crozet Master Plan. The proposal is consistent with this aspect of the Master Plan.
The application shows that a new greenway trail will be provided for public dedication,
and the route shown is consistent with the recommended trails called for by the Crozet
Master Plan Parks & Green Systems Plan.
This principle could be strengthened if a proffer statement is provided that states the
acreage, location, and timing of the greenway dedication to Albemarle County. The
proffer for the trail/greenway should also state that the developer will design and
construct the proposed trailway during subdivision/site plan stage.
The proposed trail should connect to the new sidewalk within the Orchard Drive ROW.
See transportation planning staffs comments for more information. Please revise the
concept plan to reflect this.
Additionally, more information is needed on the requested street design and special
exceptions before staff can make a final determination on whether the internal street
meets this principle.
Furthermore, the application should provide a new sidewalk within the Orchard Drive
right-of-way along the entire property frontage. Please revise the concept plan to reflect
this.
Multimodal Transportation
This principle will be met if a proffer statement is provided that sufficiently addresses
Opportunities
the comments under the Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks
principle.
Parks, Recreational
This principle is primarily met but could be strengthened through revisions. This
Amenities, and Open Space
principle could be fully met if a proffer statement is provided that states the acreage,
location, and timing of the greenway dedication to Albemarle County. The proffer for
the trail/greenway should also state that the developer will design and construct the
proposed trailway during subdivision/site plan stage.
Buildings and Spaces of
This principle is met. ARB staff have no comments or objections about the proposed
Human Scale
architecture.
Redevelopment
This principle is not applicable to the request.
Respecting Terrain and
This principle is met.
Careful Grading and Re-
grading of Terrain
Clear Boundaries Between This principle is not applicable to the request. The subject property is located within the
the Development Areas and Crozet Development Area. No improvements or changes in use near any boundaries
the Rural Area with the Rural Area are proposed.
Department of Community Development — Zoning Division
Requested changes, see attached zoning comments from Kevin McCollum, kmccollumkalbemarle.org.
Department of Community Development - Planning Division- Transportation Planning
Requested changes, see attached comments from Dan Butch, dbutch(d),albemarle.org.
Department of Community Development - Planning Division — Architectural Review Board (ARB)
No objection, see attached comments from Margaret Maliszewski, mmaliszewski d,albemarle.org.
Department of Community Development — Housing
Requested changes, see attached comments from Stacy Pethia, spethia ckalbemarle.org.
Department of Community Development — Engineering Division
Engineering review not yet complete. Comments or recommendations from the County Engineer, Frank Pohl,
fpohlkalbemarle.org, will be forwarded to the applicant upon receipt.
Department of Community Development — Inspections Division
No objection, see the attached comments from Michael Dellinger, mdellin.eg_r d,albemarle.org.
Albemarle County Department of Fire & Rescue
No objection, but see recommendations related to emergency apparatus turn around and access to lots that will be required
at site plan/road plan review. Comments from Shawn Maddox, smaddoxgalbemarle.org are attached.
VDOT
VDOT review is not yet complete. County staff will forward any comments or approvals from VDOT to the applicant
upon receipt. Please contact Adam Moore at adam.moore(c-r�,vdot.vir ig nia.gov for more information about the status of the
VDOT review.
ASCA
No objection, see attached comments from ACSA staff.
RWSA
No objection, see attached comments from RWSA staff.
Action after Receipt of Comments
Your project has been scheduled for a public hearing by the Planning Commission for (February 18, 2020) which
represents 77 days from acceptance of your application for review. From this comment letter you will see that staff
recommends changes to your project to help you achieve approval. Without changes, staff cannot recommend approval
and your application will be taken to the Commission as originally submitted.
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on "Action After Receipt of Comment Letter"
which is attached.
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal. The resubmittal date
schedule is provided for your convenience. Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place
and adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date.
Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is blan ig lle(c-r�,albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
L'�' �4w
Cameron Langille
Senior Planner
Planning Division, Department of Community Development
enc: ZMA201900016 Action After Receipt of Comments
2020 Zoning Map Amendment Resubmittal Schedule
Zoning Map Amendment Resubmittal Form
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Cameron Langille
From: Kevin McCollum
Division: Zoning
Date: 12/18/2019
Subject: ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove Comments
The following comments are provided as input from the Zoning Division regarding the above
noted application(s).
1. Parking
As outlined in Section 4.12.6 the parking requirement for these 6 proposed units is 12
spaces.
6 dwelling units * 2 spaces per dwelling unit = 12 required parking spaces
4.12.2(c) provides that only in commercial or industrial districts may the minimum
parking requirement outlined in 4.12.6 be reduced.
Parking areas shall be established on the same lot except as authorized by Section
4.12.8. Section 4.12.8 provides alternatives available to provide minimum number of
parking spaces.
Out of the listed alternatives, street parking (outlined in 4.12.9) appears to be the only
applicable alternative available to provide minimum parking. Shared parking (4.12.10) is
not applicable because the uses are the same and we cannot reduce a residential
parking requirement, stand alone parking (4.12.11) is not a permitted use in the R-2
zoning district, and transportation demand management (4.12.12) is only applicable if
the applicant proves that available alternatives will be sufficiently available to "provide"
some of the otherwise minimum parking spaces.
If the conceptual plan is to be as detailed as showing the location of parking, please
show that the minimum parking of 12 spaces will be met and located within the right of
way as outlined in 4.12.9. Please also indicate that 4.12.8(c) provision of means for safe
movement is met. Otherwise, parking allocation is typically addressed at the site
planning stage.
Zoning Review Comments for ZMA201900016
2. Density
Given the two bonus factors of development standards (15.4.2) and affordable housing
(15.4.3) the total density allowed is 5.8 du/acre. The conceptual plan should indicate that
given these bonus factors they are permitted 5.8 du/acre.
The applicant has indicated that their proposed density is 4.85 du/acre. This should be
corrected to 4.84 du/acre. (6 / 1.24 = 4.8387).
3. Dwelling Unit Yard/Setback Requirements
The conceptual plan should be corrected to reflect Section 4.11. The setbacks and
building separation indicated are correct, but the statement about accessory structures
or porches in required yards is incorrect.
Covered porches, balconies, chimneys, eaves and like architectural features may
project not more than four feet into the required rear yard.
Accessory structures are permitted in side and rear yards, provided that they are
erected no closer than five feet from any side or rear lot line.
4. Conceptual Plan
Unless proffered, the proposed development will be held to the location of the major
elements outlined in Section 33.17. The locations of these features are only required to
be as specific as they are listed. For example, buildings and parking are only required
to be shown as "envelopes."
Review Comments for ZMA201900016
Project Name: BAMBOO GROVE
Date Completed: Friday, December 20, 201 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: LDaniel Butch _ —=DDD Planning I Requested Changes Nd
Extend sidewalk within right-of-way from northern property line to southern property line along Orchard Dr Route 106_ A
Connect pedestrian trail to sidewalk within right-of-way on Orchard Dr_
Provide access easement for pedestrian trail_
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: o7O-T2020
Review Comments for ZMA201900016
Project Name: BAMBOO GROVE
Date Completed: Friday, December 20, 2019 DepartmentlDi+visionlAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Margaret M al i szews ki CDDARB No Objection
No objection_
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 1213 1920 19
Cameron Langille
From: Stacy Pethia
Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2019 4:15 PM
To: Cameron Langille
Subject: Bamboo Grove ZMA - Housing Comments
Hey Cameron,
Reading through the Affordable Housing summary on page 2, 1 have the following comments:
To comply with the county's Affordable Housing Policy, the affordable units must be made available to
households with incomes no greater than 80% AMI.
The maximum sales price for affordable for -sale units is $243,750.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thanks,
Stacy
Stacy R. Pethia, PhD
Principal Planner -Housing
Department of Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Ph: 434.296.5832 x3240
Review Comments for ZMA201900016
Project Name: BAMBOO GROVE
Date Completed: Wednesday, December 04, 01 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Michael Dellinger ADD Inspections No Obje-ction
Any site plan comments will be added during SDP review_ No abjection to the proposed ZMA_
n
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 1213112019
Review Comments for ZMA201900016
Project Name: BAMBOO GROVE
Date Completed: Wednesday: December 18. 2019 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Shawn Maddox
Fire Rescue
No Objection
Fire Rescue has no objections to the ZMA_ It should be noted that emergency apparatus turn around and access to each
structure will be required and addressed during site plan review_
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 1213 1920 19
ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — Information from Service Providers
To be filled out by ACSA for ZMA's and SP's
1) Is this site in the jurisdictional area for water and/or sewer? Yes
2) What is the distance to the closest water and sewer line, if in the jurisdictional area? Sewer is on
site. Water is along Orchard Drive.
3) Are there water pressure issues which may affect the proposed use as shown on plan? Water
pressures in the area are high. PRV will be needed.
4) Are there major upgrades needed to the water distribution or sewer collection system of which the
applicant and staff should be aware? N/A
5) Are there other service provision issues such as the need for grinder pumps? N/A
6) Which issues should be resolved at the SP/ZMA stage and which issues can be resolved at the site
plan/plat stage?
7) If the project is a large water user, what long term impacts or implications do you forsee?
8) Additional comments? Proposed landscaping should be outside ACSA easements.
Cameron Langille
From: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 5:19 PM
To: Richard Nelson; Dyon Vega; Cameron Langille
Subject: RE: ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove review
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Richard,
Thank you. You are correct, please note that a flow acceptance may be required prior to final site plan or final plat
approval, and RWSA has no objections to the proposed rezoning. We will review our policy to determine whether in the
future all development in Crozet will continue to require a flow acceptance, particularly once construction of the Flow
Equalization tank in Crozet is completed. If the policy changes, we will make you aware.
Let me know if you need anything further on this.
Thanks,
Victoria Fort, P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
695 Moores Creek Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(0): (434) 977-2970 ext. 205
(F): (434) 295-1146
From: Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 11:14 AM
To: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>; Dyon Vega <DVega@rivanna.org>; Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove review
Victoria,
The application shows 6 units.
Richard Nelson
Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
(434) 977-4511
From: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 11:02 AM
To: Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org>; Dyon Vega <DVega@rivanna.org>; Cameron Langille
<blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove review
Richard,
Dyon is out until after Christmas. What's the unit count for this development?
Victoria Fort, P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
695 Moores Creek Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(0): (434) 977-2970 ext. 205
(F): (434) 295-1146
From: Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 9:34 AM
To: Dyon Vega <DVega@rivanna.org>; Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Cc: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>
Subject: RE: ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove review
Dyon,
I want to confirm the RWSA sewer capacity certification is not needed for this. It was my understanding all new
development in Crozet requires this certification.
Thanks,
Richard Nelson
Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
(434) 977-4511
From: Dyon Vega <DVega@rivanna.org>
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2019 10:04 AM
To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Cc: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>; Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org>
Subject: ZMA201900016 Bamboo Grove review
Cameron,
RWSA has reviewed application ZMA01900016 Bamboo Grove. Below is a completed copy of the form that was provided
to us by Elaine Echols for SP & ZMA Applications.
To be filled out by RWSA for ZMA's and SP's
1. Capacity issues for sewer that may affect this proposal None Known
2. Requires Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Capacity Certification Yes X-No
3. Water flow or pressure issues that may affect this proposal None Known
4. "Red Flags" regarding service provision (Use attachments if necessary) None Known
Please let me know if you have any questions.
4
Dyon Vega
Civil Engineer
RNANINA
1YATERA�TH
Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority
(434) 977-2970, Ext. 170
695 Moores Creek Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
www.rivanna.org
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
trRrtNl°'
ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER
FIRST SET OF COMMENTS
Your project has been scheduled for a public hearing by the Planning Commission for February 18,
2020, which is 77 days from the date your application was accepted for review. State Code requires a
90-day review by the Planning Commission unless the applicant requests deferral. As you will read in
this comment letter, staff recommends changes to your project to help you achieve approval. Without
these changes, staff cannot recommend approval to the Planning Commission.
If you would like to address the comments you must request deferral by January 24, 2020. If you
choose not to request deferral, staff will take your project to the Commission as originally submitted,
but without a recommendation of approval. Instructions for requesting a deferral are outlined below.
Please note that you can submit revisions even if you defer your application.
Please do one of the following on or before January 24, 2020:
(1) Request deferral to resubmit to address comments, pursuant to Section 33.52(A)(1).
Please understand that if a deferral request is made, the Planning Commission public
hearing date will be later than February 18, 2020.
(2) Request to proceed to a Planning Commission public hearing on February 18, 2020. All
advertising fees must be paid by January 24, 2020.
(3) Withdraw your application.
(1) Deferral Request and Resubmittal
To request deferral, you must submit a request in writing to defer action by the Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors. The request may be made by email. You may request a deferral for up to 36
months from the date your application was accepted for review, which is December 4, 2022. However,
all outstanding information necessary for Commission action must be submitted by August 4, 2022,
according to the published schedule. (See Section 18-33.52 (A)(2) of the Albemarle County Code).
Revised 10-9-18 MCN
(2) Proceed to Planning Commission Public Hearing on February 18, 2020
At this time, you may request that your application proceed to public hearing with the Planning
Commission on February 18, 2020. With this option, staff will take your project to the Commission as
originally submitted, but without a recommendation of approval.
(3) Withdraw Your Application
If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing.
Resubmittals
As stated above, a deferral does not preclude you from resubmitting the application to address
changes based upon the comments. If you would like to resubmit after you defer, you may do so
following the resubmittal schedule. Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last page of your
comment letter with vour submittal.
The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal.
Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee Schedule.)
Failure to Respond
An application shall be deemed to be voluntarily withdrawn if the applicant requests deferral pursuant
to subsection 33.52(A), and fails to provide within 120 days before the end of the deferral period all of
the information required to allow the Board to act on the application. (See Section 18-33.53 (C) of the
Albemarle County Code).
Fee Payment
Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter. Make
checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review Coordinator.
Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system, accessed at
http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685.
Revised 10-9-18 MCN
2020 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits
and Zoning
Map Amendments
Mandatory
Preapp must be
held no later
than this day to
file application
by Deadline for
Filing
Deadline for Filing
(3 P.M.)
First Set of
Written
Comments
Due to
Applicant
EITHER
Planning
Commission
Public Hearing
if No
Resubmittal is
Necessary
No sooner than
OR
Resubmittal
Deadline"
PLEASE SEE
THE
RESUBMITTAL
SCHEDULE
Monday
Monday
Friday
Tuesday
Monday
Jan 06
Tue Jan 21
Mar 06
May 05
**
Feb 03
Tue Feb 18
Apr 03
Jun 02
**
Mar 02
Mar 16
May 01
Jun 16
**
Apr 06
Apr 20
Jun 05
Aug 04
**
May 04
May 18
Jul 02
Sep 01
**
Jun 01
Jun 15
Jul 31
Sep 22
**
Jul 06
Jul 20
Sep 04
Oct 20
**
Aug 03
Aug 17
Oct 02
Dec 01
**
Sep 07
Sep 21
Nov 06
Jan 05
**
Oct 05
Oct 19
Dec 04
Feb 02 2021
**
Nov 23
Dec 07
Jan 22 2021
Mar 23 2021
**
Dates with shaded background are not 2020.
SPs for offsite or electric message signs follow the Variance schedule for the BZA.
2021 dates are tentative.
* Board of Supervisors' worksessions and public hearings will be scheduled after the Planning Commision's
action on applications.
** Resubmittals are accepted on ANY resubmittal Monday listed after the date of the written comments to
the applicant. The PC public hearing date is the earliest date at which the request may be heard after the
corresponding resubmittal deadline date.
These schedules provide basic information. Please consult with the Planning Division for more
details regarding schedules and processing
2020 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal Schedule
Resubmittal Dates (1st,
3rd, and 5th Monday of
the month)
Comments given to the
Applicant
Applicant requests PC
Public Hearing AND
Payment Due for Legal
Ad (no additional
resubmittals)
Planning
Commission Public
Hearing No sooner
than* COB Auditorium
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
Tuesday
Jan 06
Feb 05
Feb 14
Mar 10
Jan 21
Feb 19
Feb 28
Mar 24
Feb 03
Mar 04
Mar 13
Apr 07
Feb 18
Mar 18
Mar 27
Apr 21
Mar 02
Apr 01
Apr 10
May 05
Mar 16
Apr 15
Apr 24
May 19
Mar 30
Apr 29
May 08
Jun 02
Apr 06
May 06
May 08
Jun 02
Apr 20
May 20
May 22
Jun 16
May 04
Jun 03
Jun 12
Jul 07
May 18
Jun 17
Jun 26
Jul 21
Jun 01
Jul 01
Jul 10
Aug 04
Jun 15
Jul 15
Jul 24
Aug 18
Jun 29
Jul 29
Aug 07
Sep 01
Jul 06
Aug 05
Aug 07
Sep 01
Jul 20
Aug 19
Aug 28
Sep 22
Aug 03
Sep 02
Sep 11
Oct 06
Aug17
Sep 16
Sep 25
Oct 20
Aug 31
Sep 30
Oct 16
Nov 10
Sep 08
Oct 07
Oct 16
Nov 10
Sep 21
Oct 21
Oct 30
Nov 24
Oct 05
Nov 04
Nov 06
Dec 01
Oct 19
Nov 18
Nov 13
Dec 08
Nov 02
Dec 02
Dec 18
Jan 12 2021
Nov 16
Dec 16
Dec 18
Jan 12 2021
Dec 21
Jan 20 2021
Jan 29 2021
Feb 23 2021
Jan 04 2021
Feb 03 2021
Feb 05 2021
Mar 02 2021
Bold italics = submittal/meeting day is different due to a holiday.
Dates with shaded background are not 2020.
2021 dates are tentative.
*Public hearing dates have been set by the Planning Commission; however, if due to unforeseen
circumstances the Planning Commission is unable to meet on this date, your project will be moved to
the closest available agenda date.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP #
Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt # Ck# Bv:
Resubmittal of information for
k»
Zoning Map Amendment .N
PROJECT NUMBER THAT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED:
Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign
I hereby certify that the information provided with this resubmittal is what has been requested from staff
Signature of Owner, Contract Purchaser
Print Name
FEES that may apply:
Date
Daytime phone number of Signatory
❑
Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request
$194
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688
❑
First resubmission
FREE
❑
Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
$1,344
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763
❑
First resubmission
FREE
❑
Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
$1,881
To be Daid after staff review for Dublic notice:
Most applications for a Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission and one public
hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing a legal
advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice
are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be
provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body.
➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices
$215 + actual cost of first-class postage
➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50)
$1.08 for each additional notice + actual
cost of first-class postage
➢ Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing)
Actual cost
(averages between $150 and $250)
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
Revised 11/02/2015 Page 1 of 1