HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202100053 Correspondence 2021-06-29KMASDP2021.00010
Old Trial Block 32, Lots 34-40
Comment/Response Memorandum
Date: May 26, 2021
Christopher Perez
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Community Development Department
in response to the following comments dated April 1, 2021, please find the inserted response.
From the DCc1; of (fin sIoplicf Pere,
!'nnun� n;. natal �pri1 I. 21121
1. [35.11 Fees. The public notification fee of $435 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Please pay the fee prior to
any further.
(Response) Fee Paid
2. [32.5.2(a), ZMA2015-1_CODJ On the final site plan provide a chart tracking how many units are already
approved in Block 32. The maximum dwelling unit count for this block is 417 units. This will determine if the
additional units are permitted.
(Response) Added Note 422 With Unit Count. With the addition of the 2 lots as per this plan, total units proposed
Block 32 = 94
3. [ZMA2015-1_COD] Garage and Driveway Construction Detail. The setbacks are incorrectly depicted for these
lots. The lots shall front on the pocket park, as they are amenity -oriented lots, and the private street shall be the rear
of the lots. Revise the site plan to depict the correct setbacks and relocate the proposed buildings to meet the front
setback.
(Response) Revised Building Setbacks accordingly. See Sheet 2.10
4. JZMA2015-1_COD] Garage and Driveway Construction Detail. Each lot shall have a minimum of two (2) off
street parking spaces. Asphalt parking pads will be built with a minimum depth of 18 feet from the rear property
lines adjacent to the private road. Asphalt parking pads will be built with a mininimn width of 18 feet to
accommodate the required two spaces. Also, there shall be a 3-foot minimum building separation from the parking
pad to the building. Revise the final site plan to address these requirements.
(Iesponse) Added detail to Sheet 2.10
5. [ZMA2015-1_COD] Garage and Driveway Construction Detail. On the final site plan provide the grade of each
driveway. Driveway grades must be 8% or flatter.
(Response) Sec detail to Sheet 2. 10 as noted abosc in response 44.
6. 132.5.1(c), 4.12.16(b)] Design of Spaces All parking spaces shall be designed so that no part of any vehicle will
extend over any lot line, right-of-way line, sidewalk, walkway, and driveway or aisle space. Revise the plan to omit
the one (1) foot driveway easements across the property lines, as this is not permitted. The width of the lots and the
driveways shall be revised to accommodate the required parking. Each parking space shall be a minimum of 9-foot-
wide x 18-foot-long. Each lot shall have a minimum of two (2) off street parking spaces.
(Response) Easements removed. See Sheet 2.10. more particularly the Garage and Driveway Detail.
Kirk Hughes & Associates - Land Surveyors & Planners
220 East High Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902 1 Voice: (434) 296-6942 1 Email: kirk@khals.net
Micro Business Certified SWaM Certification #697836
7. [32.5.1(e), 32.5.2(b), 4.12, 4.12.8(a), 4.12.91 Alternatives available to provide minimum number ofparking
spaces. The three (3) required guest parking spaces are not provided. Per conversations with the applicant they are
utilizing on -street parking to meet the minimum number of required parking spaces. The required two (2) parking
spaces per lot cannot be located on the street but the guest parking spaces can. The approved road plan (SUB2018-
164) already accounts for 88 onstreet parking spaces before the addition of these 3 new lots/units. Ensure additional
parking spaces are available on this road to meet the minimum required guest parking space requirement for these
additional units.
On the cover sheet provide a note to this effect. Also, on the final site plan depict, label, and dimension the on -street
parking spaces and Zabel they are for guests. Prior to final site plan approval these spaces shall be reviewed and
approved by Planning, Engineering, VDOT, and Fire Rescue. These spaces were not depicted nor labeled on the
initial site plan, thus these agencies have not reviewed nor considered the appropriateness or viability of these spaces
on this road.
(Response) Br the this revised plan, additional units = 2 only being Lots 93 and 94. For clarification, added Parking
ENhibil Sheet 2.20.
8. 132.5.2(b), 4.121 On the cover sheet revise the parking notes # 17 and 418 to specifically relate to these 10
proposed units. If you would like to keep die parking data you have provided for the entire development that is
permitted; however, it should be clearly noted and blocked off that these notes and the data in them are for the
overall development. New parking notes shall be provided specifically related to these 10 proposed units.
(Response) Sec Notes #19 "Parking Required" and #20 "Parking Provided`.
9. [32.5.2(b), 4.121 On the final site plan provide a revised parking schedule of parking required and the amount
provided specific to these 10 units.
(Rcsp sofa i LinLgRequired and #20 "Parking Pros ided
10. IZMA2015-1_Proffer #2, SUB2019-1371 Affordable Housing Units. The 7 original lots (Lots 34-40) in this
section are designated on the final subdivision plat as required affordable housing units. On the final site plan label ?
of these units affordable housing units. Also, provide a note on the cover sheet that labels which of the 7 lots are
affordable housing units.
(Response) Sec Note #6 "Planned Use". Lots 34 through 40 remain affordable housing wins.
11. IZMA2015-1- COD] Provide a note on the cover sheet that state the minimum lot size shall be 1,000 SF for
SFA units.
(Response) Sec Note # 16A "Lot and Building Requirements'.
12. [ZMA2015-11 Clarify the types of housing units proposed for the lots, as there are different requirements for
different types of units. I believe the proposed units are attached single-family (townhouse) units. On the cover sheet
of the final site plan provide a note to this effect.
(Response) Sec Note #6 "Planned Use".
13. [32.5.2(n)] Label and dimension all improvements depicted on the final site plan to include, driveways, the
townhomes, all sidewalks, and all other improvements.
(Response) See sheet 2.10 for detail and unit dimensions. Meow Dole unit dimensions arc subject to change and
shall complc with applicable zoning setback requirements noted in chapter 18. sections 4.1 I .I. 4.11.2, and 4.19 of
the Albemarle County zoning code. Further note the > foot sidewalk shown w iaiin Pocket Park "A" is as shoscn oil
the RGA plan. B7 this plan no sidewalk construction other Ilan for the townhouse units is proposed
14. [32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(a)] On the final site plan dimension the property boundaries and the new lot lines.
(Response) See Shcet 2.10 for propert-N metes and bounds.
15. [32.5.1(c)] On the final site plan dimension the proposed structures and driveways.
16. [32.5.2(a)] On the final site plan provide the names of the owners, zoning district, tax map and parcel
numbers and present uses of abutting parcels.
(Response) Pocket Park "A" and Bicknell Street. a 30' private right of way. are owned by March Mountain
Properties, L.C.C.. As noted Bicknell Street is a private road and Pocket Park "A" appears to be for residential
recreational or park purposes. Please note this plan does not affect the pocket park other than tying into the existing
waterline.
17. [32.5.2(e)] Landscape Features. On the final site plan provide the existing landscape features as
described in section 32.7.9.4(c).
(Response) Please I„ I t,,.. 1 all landscape features. Limits of this project do not affect the proposed
landscaping shown thereon.
18. [Comment] Remove the phase lines from Bicknell Street.
(Response) line rentoved
19. [32.5.2(n)] On the final site plan label all the proposed paving material types for all sidewalks, parking
areas, and driveways.
(Response) Sec divot 2.1 o for driveway detail. Please note no improvements are proposed for the sidewalk within
the Pocket Park. Sidewalk is as shown on the RGA Plan.
20. [32.5.2(u)(iii), ZMA2015-1_COD] On the final site plan provide building elevations for all new or
modified structures.
(Rcsp.,n . , . ' 10 for building eleahons detail.
21. [32.7.2.11 Vehicular Access to Site. Each entrance onto any public street shall be designed and
constructed as required by the standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. VDOT approval of
the entrance to the site shall be required prior to final site plan approval.
(Response) All lot accesses arc to the misting Bicknell Street. a 30' Private Right of Way. Bicknell conaWs to
Bishopg ue Lane u, the north and to the south No improvements arc proposed adjacent to a public right of way.
22.132.8.21 A WPO plan shall be approved prior to final site plan approval.
(Response) Please eiarit% that the urea shown on WPO 201800077 pluu uotad as'Putchiug Denote .Appro,v
Buildable SF10 W" Included a, ❑np,:nn-,u�.�na
23. [32.6] The final site plan shall meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
24. [Comment] The final site plan shall not be approved until all SRC reviewers have approved the plan.
Their comments attached.
25. [SUB2018-164] The approved road plan contains required street tree landscaping in the pocket park.
To determine if there is a conflict\ with the extended water line and the planting, the final site plan shall
depict this planting (see below). It appears it will cause a conflict and the tree shall be relocated out of the
waterline easement. On the final site plan relocate the single tree.
(Response) The asbuilt location of the blow off calve is shown and appears to have been installed approximate)} IS
to 20 feel beyond its intended location, The existing waterline casement as shown oil the approved road plan has
been recorded on the subdivision plat (DB 53W Pg. 251. 255 plat) bill now extends the entire length of Pockcl Part:
A. By this plan there are no improvements other than water service laps affecting the Pocket Park. Based upon the
asbuilt location or said vah c and the proposed water .service locations said tree should be relocate within the Pocket
Park and represented on the asbuilt survey for Phase 2. Block 32.
26. [Comment] Contrary to our previous discussions there is not an approved initial site plan nor an
approved final site plan for this specific section of townhomes. Rather there is an approved final
subdivision plat (SUB2019-137) and an approved road plan (SUB2018-164).
(Response) Noted.
27. [SRC Public Comment] Staff has received and forwarded to the applicant the adjacent neighbors'
concerns about the required parking for these units. Additionally, these residents are opposed to the
additional units being added to this area.
(Response) Their concerns have been noted. Based upon the subdivision plat and its setback intent for lots 34
Through 40, it twuld seem having 3 sets of 3 units break up the visual monotony of a seven unit structure.
1'iom dic Dcsk of Emil% Coy
Continents dated April 1. 2021
1. WP0201800077 must be amended to show this new proposed layout.
(Response) Jcremy Fos rill be submitting WPO revisions.
2. Plan must be signed, sealed and dated by professional registered in Virginia.
(Response) Upon approval, plans shill be signed and scaled.
3. Please provide a detail for the proposed sidewalk.
(Response) No public sndcNwlk is proposed. Tine sidcnalk shmtin along the rear of the lots is the s:mne as approscd
by the original plans.
4. Please provide a detail for the driveway curb entrances.
(Response) Detail Added to Sheet 3.0
5. Provide the date of the topographic survey.
(Rcspurulod torn note.
6. Show proposed topography, including first floor elevations and slopes of driveways.
(Response) Proposed Grading, FFE, and slopes :umolaled.
7. Is the proposed sidewalk in an easement? Who will maintain this sidewalk?
_'i, . , � . _ l No uc�% pull: ...ill, proposed
8. Please show where roof drains will be directed.
(Response) Roof drains to be directed tmvard allc).
Upon review if you have any questions/comments feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience
Sincereli
Rob u ming
Project Manager
Kirk Hughes and Associates.
(434) 466-4260
4