Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200500141 Staff Report 2006-08-16t t ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: Commonwealth Townhouses I Staff: David Pennock, Allan Shuck Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: August 22, 2006 N/A Owners: Hurt Investment Corporation I Applicant: Lane Bonner Acreage: 1.044 acres Rezone from: Not applicable Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 61W, Section 3, Parcel 14 By -right use: R -15 (Residential) Location: Commonwealth Drive (Rte. 1315), approximately 0.68 miles from its intersection with Hydraulic Road (Rte. 743) Magisterial District: Jack Jouett Proffers /Conditions: Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: 14 DA — X RA Townhouses Proposal: Request for waiver of Sec. 4.2 building site requirements in order to disturb critical slopes and a waiver of section 32.7.2.5, which requires inter - parcel connection Character of Property: This property is partially wooded, and partially vegetated with grasses and scrub. Much of the property is a drainage ravine. No existing structures. Factors Favorable: Modification to allow activity on critical slopes: 1. This proposal represents an infill opportunity in an area identified on the Comprehensive Plan as Urban Density within established Development Areas. Waiver to eliminate inter - parcel connection: 1. Adjacent parcel is already developed and may not immediately benefit from the connection. RECOMMENDATIONS: Comp. Plan Designation: Urban Density in Urban Area 1 Use of Surrounding Properties: High - Density Residential; site is adjacent to multi- family apartment complex and across from residential townhouses Factors Unfavorable: Modification to allow activity on critical slopes: 1. Construction of the plan as shown will require significant fill and use of retaining walls within an area that is currently a drainage ravine. Waiver to eliminate inter - parcel connection: 1. There are no existing critical slopes, stream buffers, or drainage concerns that would prohibit the interconnection to be made. Critical Slopes Waiver - Generally staff finds that this request is inconsistent with the criteria of Section 4.2.5(a) for granting a modification to allow disturbance on critical slopes. If the Commission approves the waiver, staff has suggested a condition of approval. Inter - parcel Connection Waiver — Staff recommends denial of the requested waiver. STAFF CONTACT: PLANNING COMMISSION: AGENDA TITLE: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: David E. Pennock, AICP; Allan Shuck, EIT; Glenn Brooks, PE August 22, 2006 SDP 2005 -141: Commonwealth Townhomes Hurt Investment Corporation Lane Bonner APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: An application is under review for preliminary site plan approval to construct 14 townhouses on 1.044 acres, zoned R -15 (Residential) (Attachment B). The proposal indicates that critical slopes will be disturbed for the construction of buildings, parking areas, and sidewalks, as well as associated grading activities. This property is located in the Jack Jouett Magisterial District on Commonwealth Drive (Rte. 1315), approximately 0.68 miles from its intersection with Hydraulic Road (Rte. 743) (Attachment A). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This area is shown as Urban Density in Urban Area 1. REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: Approval of this application requires Planning Commission approval of a modification of Section 4.2 in order to allow disturbance of critical slopes. In addition, the applicant does not intend to provide for inter- parcel connection to the adjacent parcel, which was requested in accordance with Section 32.7.2.5. The Planning Commission must consider whether a waiver of this section is appropriate, as provided in Section 32.3.10. REVIEW OF MODIFICATION OF SECTION 4.2.3 TO ALLOW ACTIVITY ON CRITICAL SLOPES: Discussion - Critical Slopes Waiver: Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth - disturbing activity on critical slopes, while Section 4.2.5(b)(2) allows the Planning Commission to waive this restriction. The applicant has submitted a request and justification for the waiver (Attachment Q. Staff has reviewed this waiver request with consideration for the concerns that are set forth in Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled "Critical Slopes." These concerns have been addressed directly through the analysis provided herein, which is presented in two parts, based on the Section of the Ordinance to which each pertains. Section 4.2.5(a): Aesthetic Resources: The Open Space Plan is the primary tool used by staff to identify aesthetic resources. The maps in the Open Space Plan include "inventory maps" which show all resources. The "composite map" then indicates those resources that are of the highest significance or are part of a system forming a significant resource, such as a stream valley or mountain range. This site is not shown on either map to contain such features. The Open Space and Critical Resource plan does not identify any significant features on this site. In addition, this site is not a part of either the Hydraulic Road or Route 29 Entrance Corridors. The aesthetic resources on this site do not appear to be substantial. However, as noted in the review by Current Development Engineering staff, the site is very visible to a number of existing residential structures. Review of the request by Current Development Engineering Staff- The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed. The engineering analysis of the request follows: Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: 2 This is a drainage ravine and slope next to Commonwealth Drive, and between existing apartment and townhouse developments. The site plan proposes the creation of a developable area by building the area up with retaining walls and fill. A graphic of the site plan is below: ilfll: .�Vi - qti critical Slope Areas t -� , N Nd6y3B'S3-E 1 frlf 1!1111 '4'" - , 1 -- on J { TAX N+ n+1r z + DUMPSTEQ + W+TH MFtpq�r EW— LQ5IRC W f �f Area to prc�ide i rite rp arc 0 � connection 7 4 9 Z7 � Y I i / u Cl rt W Areas Acres Total site 1.04 acres Critical slopes 0.31 r��•r , i ?rs tit Critical slopes disturbed 0.3 97% of critical slopes 1 -- on J { TAX N+ n+1r z + DUMPSTEQ + W+TH MFtpq�r EW— LQ5IRC W f �f Area to prc�ide i rite rp arc 0 � connection 7 4 9 Z7 � Y I i / u Cl rt W Areas Acres Total site 1.04 acres Critical slopes 0.31 31% of site Critical slopes disturbed 0.3 97% of critical slopes P 61W PARM 43 -5 9ii .Tj T USE : ARAIKENT! : P!q Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable alternative locations: The entrance travelway disturbs critical slopes. However, there are alternative entrance locations and layouts, so this is not exempt. Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2: "movement of soil and rock" This site will be built entirely with retaining walls and fill, which will have a limited design life for 3 stability. Proper wall construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of soil after construction. "excessive stormwater runoff" Stormwater runoff will change due to added impervious areas, and release rates will be controlled by the drainage plan proposed, as required by the Water Protection Ordinance. "siltation " A silt trap will likely be necessary on the slopes below this site to capture siltation during construction. Access to the retaining walls, as well as perimeter erosion control measures will also require off-site land disturbance. Inspection and bonding by the County can try to ensure siltation control during construction, but with sites like this, where improvements are built to property lines, it is very difficult to control siltation without off-site disturbances. "loss of aesthetic resource" This area is visible from Commonwealth Drive and the neighboring residential developments (see aerial photo - Attachment D). The applicant had indicated these are all man -made slopes and this cannot be verified. However, it is likely that portions were created with fill for Commonwealth Drive and the adjacent parking lot. "septic effluent" This is not a concern as the site is serviced by public sewer. It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider the possible long term consequences of creating developable areas held up by retaining walls over existing slopes. It appears to be the intent of the Ordinance to prohibit this sort of use on critical slopes. Based on the above review, approval cannot be recommended by Engineering. Section 4.2.5(b): Staff has included the provisions of Section 4.2.5b here (in italics), along with staff comment on the various provisions: b. The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that: (Amended 11- I5 -89) 1. Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare, or that alternatives proposed by the developer would satisfy the purposes of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree; or (Added 11- 15 -89) Based on the Engineering analysis provided above, it is staffs opinion that a strict application of the requirements set forth in Section 4.2 does act to forward the purposes of the chapter. The alternative (approval of the plan as shown) does not demonstrate that the public health, safety or welfare are equally served. 2. Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the requirements of section 4.2 would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or would result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties. Such modification or waiver shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, or to adjacent properties, or be contrary to sound engineering practices; or (Added 11- 15 -89) The requirements of the Ordinance do not unreasonably restrict the use of the property. In the event that the waiver is not granted, it may be possible for the site to be redesigned to show a development proposal outside of critical slope areas. However, some reduction in the scope of this project would be 2 necessitated. 3. Granting such modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be served by strict application of section 4.2. (Added 11- 15 -89) This site has existing zoning for high density residential development (R -15 — Residential). It is shown on the Comprehensive Plan as an Urban Density neighborhood. This proposal represents an infill opportunity in the Development Areas. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request with consideration for the required criteria. The review has resulted in mixed findings for and against approval of the waiver: Factors favorable to approval of a modification to allow activity on critical slopes: 1. This proposal represents an infill opportunity in an area identified on the Comprehensive Plan as an Urban Density within established Development Areas. Factors unfavorable to approval of a modification to allow activity on critical slopes: 1. Construction of the plan as shown will require significant fill and use of retaining walls within an area that is currently a drainage ravine with associated critical slopes. Generally staff finds that this request is inconsistent with the criteria of Section 4.2.5(a) for granting a modification to allow disturbance on critical slopes. Therefore, staff is not able to recommend approval to the Commission of a modification of Section 4.2.3. However, if the Planning Commission does approve the critical slopes waiver request, the following conditions is recommended: 1. Temporary off -site easements for land disturbance on all three abutting properties are required prior to approval of final plan. These easements must accommodate both construction access and erosion control measures. REVIEW OF MODIFICATION OF SECTION 32.7.2.5 — (Provision of Inter - parcel Connection): Dkcuccinn- Section 18- 32.7.2.5 - The Commission or agent may require provision for and /or construction of travel lanes or driveways to serve adjoining parcels. During the review of the preliminary site plan for this project, staff requested the provision of a connection to the adjacent parcel, Trophy Chase Apartments. A likely location is delineated on the site plan graphic provided in the preceding section. The applicant requested a waiver from this requirement (attachment D). This request has been reviewed in accordance with Section 32.3.10, as presented below. Section 32.3.10: a. The commission may modify, waive, or accept substitution for any requirement of section 32.7 in a particular case upon a finding that requiring such improvement would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare; or in the case of substitution, that such alternative would satisfy the purpose of this chapter to at least an equivalent degree as the required improvement. Requiring the provision of an interconnection on the subject property will effectively provide connection to the Trophy Chase Apartments, as the entrance drive appears to encroach across the common property line. Because that site is already developed, it is unclear whether they will benefit from this connection. However, the layout of the existing property suggests that the most likely points for connection will be in the existing drive aisles. Thus, this connection may allow circulation between the properties without the use of 5 Commonwealth Drive. b. Whenever, because of unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interests of the developer, strict application of the requirements of section 32.7 would result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties, the requirement may be modified or waived by the commission; provided that such modification or waiver shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, or to adjacent properties County Engineering staff has reviewed this request. Their analysis indicates that the existing topography allows the extension of the new accessway to the existing travelway for Trophy Chase Apartments to be made easily. There are no existing critical slopes, stream buffers, or drainage concerns that would prohibit the interconnection to be made. c. Upon finding in any case that by substituting of technique, design or materials of comparable quality, but differing from those required by section 32.7, a developer would achieve results which substantially satisfy the overall purposes of this chapter in a manner equal to or exceeding the desired effects of the requirement in section 32.7, the commission may approve such substitution of technique, design or materials No substitution for this requirement has been requested. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request with consideration for the required criteria. Generally staff finds that this request is inconsistent with the criteria of Section 32.3.10 for granting a modification. Therefore, staff recommends denial to the Commission of a modification of Section 32.7.2.5. Attachments: A - Location Map B - Site Plan Reduction C - Applicant's Request and Justification (Critical Slopes) D - Applicant's Request and Justification (Inter - Parcel Connection) E - Aerial Photo of property 2