Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200600163 Staff Report 2007-04-17�-z J7F�G1131R, ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: Lake Ridge Preliminary Staff: David Pennock, Allan Shuck Subdivision Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: April 17, 2007 Not applicable Owners: Pantops — Lakeridge, LLC Applicant: Southern Development Acreage: 253.34 Rezone from: Not applicable (103.33ac. R -1, 61.83ac. RA, 89.15ac. PRD) Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 78, Parcel 57 By -right use: RA, R -1, and PRD — Single - Location: proposed access from Fontana family residential Drive [Route #1765]. Magisterial District: Rivanna Proffers /Conditions: see recommendation in report Requested # of Dwelling Lots: 104 — (97 R- DA — 103.33 acres RA — 150 acres 1 and 7 RA) Proposal: Applicant proposes subdivision Comp. Plan Designation: The served by Public Streets. The current plan Comprehensive Plan designates this property requires waivers for critical slopes disturbance as, in part, Neighborhood Density in and proposes Open Space. Development Areas Neighborhood 3 and, in part, Rural Areas in Rural Area 1. Character of Property: This property is Use of Surrounding Properties: Adjacent to mostly wooded and fairly steep. No existing multiple residential subdivisions, including structures are on the site. Franklin, Ashcroft West, Cascadia, and Fontana. Factors Favorable: (multiple — see report) Factors Unfavorable: (multiple — see report) RECOMMENDATION: Zoning Ordinance Waivers: 1. Waiver of Section 4.2.5 — disturbance of critical slopes (recommendation, approval) 2. Section 4.7 — approval of Open space (recommendation, approval) Other Actions (Subdivision Ordinance): 3. Section 14 -220 — Approval of the preliminary subdivision plat recommendation, approval STAFF PERSON: David E. Pennock, AICP; Allan Schuck, EIT PLANNING COMMISSION: April 17, 2007 AGENDA TITLE: SUB 2006 -163 Lake Ridge Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Southern Development PROPERTY OWNERN: Pantops — Lakeridge, LLC APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: Request for preliminary plat approval to create 104 lots with internal public streets on 163.72 acres, with open space, within a 252.72 acre parcel (Attachment A). The property is zoned R -1, Residential (103.33 acres), RA, Rural Areas (61.83 acres), and PRD, Planned Residential District (89 acres). The PRD zoned portion of the property is not a part of the current request. The property is described as Tax Map 78, Parcel 57. It is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District at the end of the proposed Fontana Drive (Rte. #1765). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as, in part, Neighborhood Density in Development Areas Neighborhood 3 and, in part, Rural Areas in Rural Area 1. REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: This proposal is a by -right subdivision, and so would typically be reviewed and approved administratively. However, the applicant has requested a waiver of Ordinance requirements for disturbance of critical slopes, and the application was requested for Planning Commission review by a neighbor. The subdivision also proposes open space. Therefore, the Commission must act on the waiver and the appropriateness of the open space as well as the plat itself. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: This parcel included a very large area; thus, much of the history is now associated with other projects. ZMA 1994 -006 — North Pantops, LLC — Portions of the property currently under review were zoned to R -1. Property over 600 feet in elevation was not; elevations over 600 feet are now considered to be in the Rural Areas. SUB 2004 -103, SUB 2005 -180 — Lakeridge — These are previous preliminary plat submittals for similar projects to the current proposal. Both have since been withdrawn. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ZMA 1979 -027, ZMA 1988 -004, ZMA 1997 -002 — Initiated and twice amended a plan for the Planned Residential Development (PRD) (formerly known as RPN); this area is still part of this property, but is not part of the subject proposal. SUB 2005 -091, SUB 2006 -375 — Ashcroft West — This is a preliminary subdivision plat for the PRD zoned portion of the property. This subdivision plat received preliminary approval for 28 lots. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUB 1997 -036, SUB 1998 -062, SUB 1998 -273, SUB 1999 -082, SUB 1999 -088 — These are the approvals for the preliminary and final plats for Fontana, Phases 1A, 1B, 2A, and 213, which were formerly part of this property. SP 1997 -034 — Special Permit approval for Frost Montessori School SDP 1997 -078 — Preliminary Site Plan approval for Frost Montessori School DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission will need to act on the waiver request, and make findings on the appropriateness of the proposed Open Space (Attachment D). This staff report is organized to address each issue separately. The Commission must act on all of the items. The items to be addressed are: Subdivision Ordinance 1. Section 14 -220 — review of the preliminary subdivision plat Zoning Ordinance 2. Waiver of Section 4.2.5 — disturbance of critical slopes 3. Section 4.7 - approval of Open space This item has previously been before the Planning Commission on two occasions — August 22, 2006 and November 7, 2006. Based on discussions at these meetings and recommendations from staff, the applicant has modified the application substantially. An urban cross - section has now been proposed through all of the development areas. Road widths and cross - section are designed to tie in with the adjacent development of Fontana, Phase 4C. Open space areas and conceptual stormwater and erosion and sediment activities have all been adjusted to limit the fragmentation of tree areas and potential disturbance to conservation areas. The applicant has also placed approximately 24 acres of trees along the ridgeline in to an easement held by the Public Recreational Facilities Association. 1. CRITICAL SLOPES WAIVER A modification to allow critical slopes disturbance is necessary before the preliminary plat can be approved by the Planning Commission. The request for a modification has been reviewed for both the Engineering and Planning aspects of the critical slopes regulations. Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth - disturbing activity on critical slopes, while Section 4.2.5(b) allows the Planning Commission to waive this restriction. The applicant has submitted a request and justification for the waiver (Attachment C), and staff has analyzed this request to address the provisions of the ordinance. Critical slopes cover approximately 50. 10 acres, or 30 percent, of the 164.19 acres included in this request. This request is to disturb 6.46 acres, or 13 percent, of these critical slopes. The critical slopes in the area of this request do not appear to be man -made. 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 each pertains to. 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 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. The Open Space Plan shows "slopes > 25 %" on this property on the "Inventory Map 1 ". However, they are not reflected on the "Composite Map ". This property is represented as part of an import ant wooded area, though. Based on the content of the Open Space Plan, staff opinion is that the critical slopes on this site do not represent a significant resource. However, other aesthetic resources related to the wooded area are represented. Section 4.2.5(a) Review of the request by Current Development Engineering staff: The request for a waiver to develop on areas of critical slope for grading incorporated with the new construction proposed on TMP 78 -57 was received on 27 February 2007. These critical slopes are part of the Southwest Mountains across from Darden Towe Park and next to the Fontana and Ashcroft Subdivisions. They are shown on the preliminary plat, rev. date 26 February 2007, Sheet C -4, 4 of 10. The preliminary plat consists of areas located in R -1 and RA zoning. The applicant states that this request concerns only the R -1 section of the property. Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: The critical slope area, within TMP 78 -57, appears to be natural slopes. The critical slope disturbances are in the form of subdivision construction; single family residences, driveways, streets, stormwater facilities, and water and sanitary sewer lines. Areas Acres Total site in Lake Ridge 143.48 Critical slopes 50.10 Approx. 35% of site area Critical slopes disturbed 6.46 Approx. 13% of critical slopes will be disturbed Below, each of the concerns of Zoning Ordinance section 18 -4.2 is addressed: 1. "movement ofsoil and rock ": The applicant will need to provide an erosion and sediment control plan for controlling the movement of soil and rock involved with the proposed construction. A conceptual overall grading plan has been provided by the applicant to ensure that perimeter and interior erosion and sediment control measures will be designed, built, and inspected effectively. The applicant has shown that the limits of clearing and grading will be at least ten (10) feet from the proposed limits of the tree preservation areas. However, the plan does not show the required perimeter basins and traps that will be required. 2. "excessive stormwater run-off": The applicant has provided information concerning how the stormwater runoff will be controlled by the drainage and stormwater management plan proposed for this subdivision. The stormwater management concepts are not finalized and are expected to change. The applicant has now proposed curb and gutter and pipe systems to convey the onsite drainage to the SWM facilities. 3. "siltation of natural and man -made bodies of water": There is an existing intermittent stream located along the western property line. This area of critical slope disturbance is recognized as being imperative to providing access to the subdivision. The applicant will need to demonstrate proposed means or methods of preventing siltation occurring where the road will cross the intermittent stream. 4. "loss of aesthetic resource ": This site is visible from many areas in Charlottesville, but most notably, Route 20 North, Darden Towe Park, and portions of the Fontana and Ashcroft Subdivisions. It is noted that the applicant has requested an increase in density for "maintenance of existing wooded areas ". The applicant has shown a "Tree Preservation Area" on the preliminary plat, however as shown on the conceptual overlot grading plan, implementing the required stormwater management and erosion control plans, it is expected that large portions of the tree preservation areas in the ravines will not be preserved. 5. "septic effluent ": No septic systems or drainfields are proposed in this project. This site is accessible to the public sanitary sewer system. This site does not drain into a waterway that is a public drinking water supply for Albemarle County. No areas of this site are located inside the 100 -year flood plain area according to FEMA Map 51003CO287D & 295D dated 04 February 2005. 4 Based on the above review, there are engineering concerns about the disturbance of the critical slopes. These issues will be addressed with an overall grading plan, with adequate perimeter erosion control provisions and curb and gutter in conjunction with a pipe system to convey storm runoff. Engineering recommends approval to the request, with the following recommended conditions of approval: 1. The provided conceptual overlot grading plan does not show the required disturbed area needed for the required E &SC basins, especially the area to the west of Lots 1 -6. The final E &SC and SWM plans need to address this concern on the final plans to the satisfaction of County staff. 2. The retaining wall located at Lots 57 and 58 be staggered as two or three walls in series as opposed to one 12' retaining to provide a safer rear yard area to these lots. The retaining walls at Lots 7 -9 are staggered as two or three walls in series. These walls are to be built within the proposed limits of clearing and grading. 3. The land shown on the preliminary plat as RA and PRD and Residue is not included in this approval. It is noted that the bonus density computation and final number of lots are still to be decided based on expected disturbances and final agreement with regard to the tree preservation areas. Review of the request by Current Development Planning staff: Summary of review of modification of Section 4.2: Section 4.2.5 establishes the review process and criteria for granting a waiver of Section 4.2.3. The preceding comments by staff address the provisions of Section 4.2.5(a). Staff has included the provisions of Section 4.2.5(b) here, along with staff comment on the various provisions. The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that: 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) Staff has worked with the applicant to reduce impact to the steepest slopes on the parcel. In addition, most of the larger areas of contiguous slopes have been preserved in open space. Although the slopes are not part of a system, as identified on the Critical Resources Map in the Open Space Plan, the area is identified as an "important wooded area ". The bulk of the portion of this proposal identified as "important wooded area" is now designated as a conservation easement held by the Public Recreational Facilities Authority. In addition, the applicant has reduced impact to the proposed open space areas through provision of a 10 -foot buffer adjacent to each. With the conditions recommended by the engineering review, staff finds that the alternative proposals will satisfy the purposes of Section 4.2 to an equivalent degree. 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) Denial of this waiver would not prohibit or restrict the use of the property. However, some significant redesign would be necessary, which may result in reduction of scale of the project. 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 property is primarily in the Development Areas, and represents a low density residential development in an area designated on the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential. As such, a change in zoning on the property would more effectively provide for the level of development recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The applicant has proposed the dedication of a large wooded area to a conservation easement and additional protections to proposed open space. With these changes since the last proposal, Staff is able to find that the provisions of Section 4.2.5(b) have been met. The design avoids many of the steepest slopes and includes areas of tree preservation. Staff is able to recommend approval to the Commission of a waiver of Section 4.2.3 with the following conditions: 1. The provided conceptual overlot grading plan does not show the required disturbed area needed for the required E &SC basins, especially the area to the west of Lots 1 -6. The final E &SC and SWM plans need to address this concern on the final plans to the satisfaction of County staff. 2. The retaining wall located at Lots 57 and 58 must be staggered as two or three walls in series as opposed to one 12' retaining to provide a safer rear yard area to these lots. These walls are to be built within the proposed limits of clearing and grading. 2. OPEN SPACE This development proposes open space. This open space is voluntary and not required by any provision of the ordinance, although by including tree preservation areas within the open space, the applicant is achieving a bonus density of 10 %. Open Space is not allowed in the Rural Areas. Thus, the open space is all in the R -1 zoned portions of this project. A total of 22.29 acres, or 22 percent of the R -1 zoned property, is proposed for open space. All open space must be authorized by the Planning Commission. Section 4.7 of the Zoning Ordinance below requires that appropriateness of open space be assessed as follows: 4.7.1 OPEN SPACE, INTENT Open space provisions are intended to encourage development approaches reflective of the guidelines of the comprehensive plan by permitting flexibility in design. More specifically, open space is intended to serve such varied comprehensive plan objectives as: - Provision of active /passive recreation; - Protection of areas sensitive to development; - Buffering between dissimilar uses; and - Preservation of agricultural activity. To this end, in any rezoning, subdivision plat, or site development plan proposing inclusion of open space areas, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of such areas for the intended usage in terms of such factors as location, size, size, shape and topographic characteristics. (1) As indicated in the previous section (critical slopes), some of this property is shown as an "important wooded area" on the Critical Resources Plan. Many of the designated areas are preserved in conservation easement. The open space in the R -1 areas attempts to provide for tree preservation as well. Buffers are provided adjacent to open space areas to protect them from disturbance. Paths are proposed through each section of open space and linking the sections together. This type of passive recreation is appropriate in conjunction with the proposed tree preservation. (2) The applicant's open space plan identifies many areas of critical slopes, particularly the steepest and largest contiguous areas, as part of the proposed open space area. 0 (3) There are no dissimilar uses adjacent to this development to buffer. However, there are adjacent portions of the property (and within the property) that are in the Rural Areas. Two areas of the open space will buffer between the Development Areas and the Rural Areas. The proposed roadway will provide a buffer between other portions of each. Despite this, three (3) Rural Areas lots will be adjacent to 14 Development Area lots with no buffer. (4) This proposal does not preserve agricultural activity. This will be an urban open space system. (5) The location of the open space is appropriate in that it provides protection of critical slopes, conservation of existing trees, and drainage area. (6) The proposal includes approximately 22.29 acres, or 22 percent of the R -1 zoned property. (7) The shape of the open space does not appear to pose any detriment to the development. However, it does result in fragmentation of the remaining treed areas. Open spaces are connected to each other and have points of access to the proposed public streets. (8) The bulk of the proposed Open Space is critical slopes areas. Much of the preserved area would not be considered buildable without considerable earthwork (and additional waiver). 4.7.2 USES PERMITTED IN OPEN SPACE Unless otherwise permitted by the commission in a particular case, open space shall be maintained in a natural state and shall not be developed with any man -made feature. Where deemed appropriate by the commission, open space may be used for one or more of the following uses subject to the regulations of the zoning district in which the development is located: - Agriculture, forestry and fisheries including appropriate structures; -Game preserve, wildlife sanctuaries and the like; - Noncommercial recreational structures and uses; - Public utilities; -Wells and septic systems for emergency use only (reference 4.1. 7) (Amended 6- 31 -81) - Stormwater detention and flood control devices. There are proposed easements for public water and sewer lines and fiber optic lines located in the proposed open space as well as a proposed stormwater management facility. 4.7.3 OPENSPACE, DESIGNREQUIREMENTS (Amended 11- 15 -89) 4.7.3.1 In addition to provisions ofsection 4.7.1 and section 4.7.2, in reviewing development proposing incorporation of open space, the commission may require inclusion in such open space of: (Amended 11- 15 -89) - areas deemed inappropriate for or prohibited to development such as but not limited to: land in the one hundred year flood plain and significant drainage swales; land in slopes of twenty -five (25) percent or greater; major public utility easements; stormwater detention and flood control devices; lands having permanent or seasonally high water table; (Amended 11- 15 -89) - areas to satisfy provisions of section 4.16 Recreation Regulations; (Added 11- 15 -89) - areas to provide reasonable buffering between dissimilar uses within such development and between such development and adjoining properties. (Added 11- 15 -89) 4.7.3.2 The commission may require redesign of such proposed development to accommodate open space areas as may be required under this provision; provided that, in no case, shall such redesign result in reduction 7 of the total number ofproposed dwellings unit otherwise realizable under this ordinance for conventional development. (Added 11- 15 -89) (1) There is no flood plain in the open space or on the property. (2) Large areas of critical slopes are shown in the proposed open space. (3) Sewer, water, and fiber optic easements are proposed through portions of the open space. (4) A stormwater management facility is proposed in Open Space Parcel A. (5) The soils located in the open space are shown to support seasonally high water tables as defined in Table 39D Soil and Water Features of the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Albemarle County, Virginia, August, 1985. (6) Recreational areas are not required or proposed. (7) Some of the open space provides a reasonable buffer with Rural Area lots. Other areas of open space provide a significant buffer with the adjoining Fontana Subdivision. 4.7.4 OWNERSHIP OF OPEN SPACE Open space in private ownership shall be protected by legal arrangements sufficient to ensure its maintenance andpreservation for purposesfor which it is intended. Such arrangements shall be subject to commission approval as a part of the site development plan and /or subdivision plat approval process. Open space may be dedicated to public use subject to approval and acceptance by separate resolution of the board of supervisors. Open space so dedicated shall be counted as apart of the minimum required open space. All of the open space shown on the plat is proposed to be in private ownership, and will be maintained by a homeowners association. Neighborhood Model design recommendations would suggest open space areas be more of an amenity, focal point, or other feature. While this design does not specifically accomplish that, it will provide tree preservation, buffering with Fontana Subdivision and with some portions of the Rural Areas, and a proposed path network with connections to adjacent subdivisions. Staff recommends that the Commission find the proposed open space appropriate for the proposed development. 3. REVIEW OF THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT This application has been requested for review by an adjacent property owner (Attachment G). Thus, the Planning Commission must consider the merits of the plat in accordance with Section 14 -220 of the Subdivision Ordinance. STAFF COMMENT: This project has been reviewed by the Site Review Committee and can be approved subject to Planning Commission review. However, waivers have been requested, as presented in the previous sections of this report. Currently, these items are the most critical issues outstanding. The land shown on the preliminary plat as PRD and Residue is not included in this approval. An application plan was approved on the portion of the property shown as PRD zoning. No connections between that site and this site are currently proposed. The main reason for this is as an attempt to maintain a clear separation between the Rural Areas and the Development Areas, in accordance with the neighborhood model design guidelines. The layout of Lake Ridge also attempts to provide separation between Development and Rural Areas lots where appropriate. However, the boundary between the Rural Areas and Development Areas is based on the 600 -ft elevation contour. Thus, the boundary meanders erratically. In order to maintain a consistency within the subdivision and to provide continuity of development, not all contrasting lot types are clearly separated. However, the location of the proposed roadway and large areas of open space provide a buffer in most places. The remaining 14 Development Area lots back up to three (3) Rural Area lots. These three lots are between three (3) and five (5) acres in size. In addition, the most likely building sites on these lots are closer to the proposed street, and thus farther from the proposed R -1 lots. The applicant is utilizing a by -right density bonus in the R -1 portion of the property due to provision of landscaping, tree preservation, and an internal public road network. However, it is noted that the bonus density computation and final number of lots are still to be decided based on expected changes to the disturbed areas with further refinement of the erosion and sediment and stormwater management plans. Final agreement with regard to the tree preservation areas and approval of the open space can be adjusted with final plat review. However, the current proposal includes approximately 22% tree preservation area. The planned density requires maintaining at least 20% tree preservation area. Finally, it should be noted that the Land Use Plan calls for a density of 3 -5 units per acre. There is potential that the property may be developed at a higher density if it is rezoned. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that this request is consistent with the criteria presented in the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance. If the waivers and modifications above are granted, the current layout appears to meet the requirements of the Ordinance. Thus, staff recommends approval to the Commission of the preliminary subdivision plat. Staff recommends the following conditions: ❑ 1. The provided conceptual overlot grading plan does not show the required disturbed area needed for the required E &SC basins, especially the area to the west of Lots 1 -6. The final E &SC and SWM plans need to address this concern on the final plans to the satisfaction of County staff. ❑ 2. The retaining wall located at Lots 57 and 58 must be staggered as two or three walls in series as opposed to one 12' retaining to provide a safer rear yard area to these lots. These walls are to be built within the proposed limits of clearing and grading ❑ 3. Current Development Engineer approval to include review of all applicable items as specified in the Design Standards Manual, as well as: ❑ a. The applicant needs to provide SWM facilities at the rear of Lots 1 -6.The locations of the SWM facilities need to be as far removed as possible from the buildable area of each residential lot. ❑ b. Written VDOT approval of the proposed street design is required. ❑ 4. The land shown on the preliminary plat as PRD and Residue is not included in this approval. ❑ 5. A conservation plan checklist must be completed and incorporated into the site plan with notes to show how any individual trees and groups of trees designated to remain will be protected during the construction of this project. The locations of any tree protection fencing that coincides with the limits of clearing and other methods of protection from the checklist must be shown on the plan for clear identification during field inspections. ❑ 6. Fire and Rescue Department approval is subject to field inspection and verification. ❑ 7. All accesses and roadways shall be designed in accordance with the current Subdivision Street Standards, The Minimum Standards for Entrances to State Highways and the Road Design Manual through the Virginia Department of Transportation. ❑ 8. Current Development Planner approval of final computation for density bonus. Bonus amounts to be listed on the final plat. ATTACHMENTS: A. Preliminary Plat B. Location/Detail Maps C. Applicant's Request and Justification D. Open Space Map E. Excerpt from Review by Allan Shuck, Engineer 9 F. Letters from Adjacent Property Owner G. Proffers — ZMA 94 -06 10 . , I � � I \ \ \ \ , , , � \ \ , \ \ � , \ � )-�rl , � \ I I "I 11 \\111\1'1��,� - " - I (I " , ! �� , ___ � , " / � � � � � - " -- -Ta- , \ \ \\\\ \ \\ `\� \ � � � � �,j I I,, \ � I " , , �� _,___,,_"�'_ / / '��'_ -.-- ------ � � �, / , \\ \) \ , � �,, \ X x 1, \� \` / ' / I "/ \ \\ \ - 11, "I", 1, . I I I ,,,,­, , // I I /',/ \ 11 "I ., ) 1% \ - - ____ - / " / /' "' _.__ -.1-1 _,_, "I I.- -, , ,/ / I __ I 1 \ \ " ­1 ­_ ­ <, \ X , \ I, I - _ , GRADE CHANGES REOUIRIN,G TREE WELLS OR WALA-S- � � , \ \' \, " \ , \ \\\ ,,, , , ,�___,_ ___ \ "" - / "', `_:,', J , - , 1i ,� - __ , ) ' - ­ - I - - 5- " . , ,v- " / , - - - I - ,_ "" - , ` \,\\`�,,�w,,� , I TS OF CLEARING (OUTSIDED DRIP LINE OF TREES TO BE \ \' , �, , " � , , \\ I / '/,',', , - ­,- , , / / - � - __ �tc -- - - - 1<1 \� __ , \ " , '1% 1, i �, �)Q)\ ') \ " ,, - ,' I j ,,, / , _ 0_,-� - _, _ �;: _" ", X 11 " t:AD -, ,_&;� - - __ PROPOSED I \ -, , 0 \Y\� ,,, '' , � __ ___ _-D _ Z, �\ \ , \ \ ,� - 3 It _��, , - " - , - , - fl-, - , I � 2. RK �� �` ,, I '\' \ I 1\ " \ , , ' ' , / // /, "/,/ ��, , -\ I ,,, �;,, "', , , � 1. , , "i � I / I k ,� ,_7 - L-,---J' / fl, h \ \ /� I ;_ \ - - _ � ... - CLEARINC VISIBLE TO EQUIPMENT OPERATORS. \\ , , \� :"111 - Z, - 11 � I I '1< �I,'\ I , V , " ,_ -- ""-:;/ I .- 11 I , � I I � � � __\ ­ -) , I',, ,/ / 11 \ \,\, \ "\'­', \ ­� --�-,�- - ­� __ 3� PRE CD 5TRUCTD CONFERENCE: �```\ ` � ` ``+ ` - f �\j / �'Ji /�� I � ; , ", ,,,, ,, \\, � , ,,,, ", -, ,'- --- --- I \�-)`�-�(- , -, 1. ­_ ?-) � :� - \ \' \ \ \ \ \ `\ , , ", , __ I ; I , I \ � �, �_,< _: �_",/ ,,, \ - "" , __ _� ­,­ ,- " ) - ­__ _,_ _ - "I I— _ ­ - / , I I T\ I ( 11, I-" 1�' \, ,�,��,��- , , , ,� - , - � )) 1) �\ F ION AND PROTECTION MEASURES SHALL BE REVIEWED WITH THE 1\ I , < , \\ " " , I � \ \ ,,,� ­ -- \ -1, - ,O- - Z/ I / " , "I S _ - I " I _ " __ ­ ­ - _ __ 11, q .---, ", ,,,,�`,/� ,',, , ` � 14, 4� LOU(Pk��NT OPERA|}UN AND �|U���� `\` I \> "', \ �' I I \ I ,,, -, --__ _1 -11, , ,,., --,, _ -�­ S, ----_,, -, - _ . - / / ,, - /' 2 -, _ - -1 , __ '\ , , 5�1�111 1 / 7,-,-. ­­ I - -­I1N 'THE DRIPLINES OF TREES TO BE SAVED. - , I , , , ) " /" , I )' I, '') / I/ I 010 � � I k 3 , � , / 1( I \� ) - -"-,- \ . -4 I \, __ __ " ­, 11 ­ " ,­ , / 5� SOIL EROSION D S7ORMWATER DETENTION DEVICES: ' , / " � - _1 � �/ \ _-_J-,:3�;;` TREES TO BE" SAVED, , - // ,,, / // /,/,)"/, ( , / ,\, \ I \ , // I / ", -11"" /'/" // /' ,,\ ­_ -­ -- \�_�,­,�:---_ ,__ , , - 11 - I l4 , - 6. FIRES - --^ , , , - /� , , 'Y , , _') , I - ' 7, TOXIC MATERALS NOT BE STORED WI'THIN '100 FEEJ OF' TF-IE DR - IPLINE OF 'TREES TO BE SAVED. - ­--, 7 ) \, t f - X, , I', Ix J, ?._,� _ �_ -_ V_ FENCING: ' - ~. ~ � _ � ' I ,,,,;,, / I / /, I / " , )�Nl � � jjj� �\ \ -IOSED BUILDING OR GRADING - PRIOR 1-0 GRADING OR CONSTRUCTION. I / / ' / / � "I - " 1, / / "" \ , r 0 ­11 /11 / _. TREE WELLS: / ' � / / / WHEN THE GROUND LEVEL MUST BE RAl�F� YV|TH|N THE DR|PL|NE OF A TREE TO �[ SAVED. TRFF / WELL �HALL �E PROVIDED; AND A CONSTRUCTION DETAIL �UBKJOTD FOR APPROVAL. / � � � 1O� "TREE WALLS: ` \ x\` VVHFN THE GROUND LEVEL MUST B� L(�VFRFD WITHIN THE UR|PL|NF �F A TRFF TD B� �AVF� `` � ... C'_ " - " - " \�� ", / " , ') / , _ ,,-. / , -1 I -, ,', I � I �, ­1 , , 'TREE WELL, SHALL BE PROVIDED; AND A CONSTRUCTION DETAIL SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL. \1 ` ` - , _K I 'N. 't / // ; I J\ �,, I 1 � / �r _77- , 'L., - ,�, , , 1, , 11, TRENCHING AND TUNNEL|NC� ���`` ,--� ' VVHEN TRENCHING |� REQUIRE[,) WITHIN THE UKJU� OF CLEARING D SHALL BE DONE AS F�� � FROM THE TRUNKS OF TREES A� POSSIBLE. 'TUNNELING UNDER A LARGE TREE SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS AN ALTERNATIVE WHEN IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT NECE3�ARY TR[NCH|N� VV}LL __ __ __ ;.� __ \ ,_ - - - _�S / / ) � _1 � ___ - ___ ,--- DESTROY F[[DER ROOTS. 13, CLEANUP� c� ,� I - - �, x I I I ' " �'\ 1 I, , \, ,- -- \ \ ty , � I � � � � - - -, " - -, __ " -1- 1, �' <y / / " �� Q ( I I " -"'- 1_7' : _�_ _ - e----_- � ,_,_ _ �t PROTECT|VE FENCING SHALL BE -THE L�5l ITEMS REMOVED DURING TH� F|NAL CLEANUP. v^ \r \ \�\ - -, - -/ 4 `\ \ " �� /_ � � _ 1. )j DAMAGED TRE��� ^ - \` \` `` � ~~ ^~ � � r \ \ \ ` \ !�' // / '~ ? l `, ~` `--^~ '/ OAk�AC�D TR��S ALL BE TREATED }K4K�ED!AT�[Y BY PRUNING, FERTILIZATION OR OTHER __ -- "-\ ` /_ \ &���- �r ^ '/ // ``� ~ `,~`�`~~````_-- -- -- -- `�\ \ \ ~. ~^ -~ ~~~. 11 1-1 - 1 11, ': \ ,,, , " \ --, I I I I � --, ,,_ - - I \ \ , ,� ,\ - __ - - I )_ � , \, �,\ � I , - - - __ I X, A, I \ - \ 11�`,V� ,--.-,-. -"I,/- , - , _\ - I , __ ,�, -- ,- , I - - __ , �_,, , - , . , , , , // / \ -p % \ \ \ \ " , " , - , ­ - "_( 1.1, - - --- / , , $�, /w, I _/�,/ , \ \ � Y , - \ 11 - '__ - _1_ - \ � ) "' , I __ - _711- ,� ," ­ , � , \ I \ , _/:,��, -, \ , - , - - - �_ J-,-) � - , f - � /, / I'k, " - I I x � 1-:_ - \____7 �"_ �_ �,,,_,,, V, ­ - __ __ ,:�- (-,-, , � �\ , `11� I - I � - � r �� j - - I/ I \ \_ / /I ; ); I � � , " , 1, A-Z o , If I - X , , t - �1/ I ,� I 11 . --- " , I i , I � \ -\ I / - \ \ \ 'y \ ,\ T � I , / I I ,,, \, \� )� , I,- -1. _1 , " --,,,, J, -"/, ' - __ - - o- -� ' ' /\ ' 1 � � A " , , V), I I ,// , /1 / I- -- 7 - - � , I/ - _�_ � - -(-. \ , , I .�z - I , - __ __ �_, ) �'t � / - � � , // /I ,,�, /­[ - __ � , , � , ��, rl / / � I .j " I " - I I I � - __ / / ,_ 11__,_ I / ) / I \ I \/ ��,)_ � I "I " - -1 , - , � , _,� , '1 0 A \"-, - _ )o - __ -, I , w 11 I _/'U'11� _ " I \ � / __ , ,� I � \ I " / / / � , / / , � �\� I � � , __ -, , ( " , I " / / I 0 I � W), ! b� - , " -, I , \ � , I - /I 1_,, ,\, - /./ __V - _\ ­­ +� ­1(,� I / // ,,, , I I 1\ - N , // // , , , ,,,, 1C ,,�N 11 / ')( ,-\" I `� - /_ - __ 11 ")", I ��] I \ \/ I ,, 1, _ - __-_ ­'-_ , -- - " - - __ I N / _ I - ­ _ " I - ­ 1c, " i I " ,I \ / ,c \ �,,� "I �, Nc \ ��, _­ - I � , , -, -, , ko C, \ , YX 11 11 I I -'- I \ I \ 1­1 , ­1 I- , -1 __ ,,'��-- , - -- �0 111�z �I I / , ' "T, - , - , -------- - - - , I - /_1 \ , X, "" z I,/ Q),7/ ,,,1'7� ---- -- - - \\ I I", \ \\\ , - I , / I < '_ � _,\__-�N', - ,-I a-_- __ - , ,\\ ­"\,/�\ , ,,� /, ,/ ,\ ­ I , ... 1 71,_/ , , , , , ", - - ---", , _ '.. , \ I \/ -, - ,\\ "'. -, " , , 1\ I 1 __ 4", 11, 1�1' I , J, ",-,-,"<­ _,,�, -, / ^ \ ­ 11 ,,, ,'I 7_77 P_ /\�, , " ­ I I . - - 11<�, \ , , I z"', !, / - "I, - ,�,��4 \ - V. ­ �_,__ __ --- __ -, - - __ , ��) \ ,, _�_ ' J) -- 4,�-, ',, 1, , I \ ,� - ___ 0 _:�___ \ �,),/ If , I I , "\X \1' " , , , , ', Ic"- - __-,---;­,�2/- 7111 " 1, - 400 - �/Jf - "II- .",-,- _ 1 , I , " �,�, - ,- ��', \ �1_ 11 --- ,� --- ,, " ­ , ", - - , __ " ( p - 9 ,_ , , Y ­\ ­- ') I-_ E Q, E N D �) I 1- ,�, lr� � / 1, i -, i I 8 I _ I - , I I /I z , - I I ` 11_11 - --- - ­ I/ / 1, , , TREE -,><-, " \ � ___ I \ _ , - -- - ,,, -fl- �- J- J, - 1"t " - u L L-T L- , " " - : �- , - , 11 I - 2 I STREET TREES TQ B[ PLANTED 5O' (} C. /J�� \~ '/ / / ---------- ---- ~`_` � ���' '�~- ~~ � -- -_ � ` (V/ /' / "' ~� -~ / / / ~` \ ' �� ` ' ~~ \ TOTAL) /` ' `~--~-~ /' � /|�� [�T� '���/! ���� REDUCTION / ��°�/ / X ~'� / / ----- \ � ` '�-~' ^~ ��'��^� ";� ' K�U~ \ ~ -11 / / ~' / / ~~ �� \ ` ' ' � '' ~� '' �, ~' �~GRAPHIC .~~.-� ~~ ~� ~~�~ `` / / ~` TREE CDN�[�VAT|DN CM�CKL|�T SHALL. B[ ~ / ~~ ~ - ~ -- '_ ~� / / ~ ~ ' '' /' ~__ __ ' / -~--~ ~~ ~~ /' / ~~ ~~ ~\ `�� ~- -~-~~�� �� ~/�/ / / / ° /_ ^ /^ ~- FOLLOWED TO PROTECT TREES |N TREE / __ / / / _~~ -- _- __ __ _- ~~ /' /. \ ` �~ ~. ~�~~�~�� ������-~ ~_ ~~ / / // '~' _� MAINTENANCE AREAS. / / ~~ � ~~ � / / / \~`�� ��'' � �__ - -- , ~- � / ' � � 11 � � / � ~~ ~' y / / `_ _~ � ��� ~- _� ~~ \ \` 'I-,' � � / rorc �^^'^.�r^/^^/rc ^oc^r �u^' / nr /' � \\`���� `��,\�+�� �`*�'.���� \��� _~�~�- / `�.-�--~/�/ ~~ ~' ^~� / / -- -� - ^~ \ `� � �� ��� -- -' .p�� mxxv/uvm"�� .`o u PROT[CTED USING THE 1882 E&:3C HANDBOOK STD Oc SPEC 3,38� �OKAMENTS REVISED TO URBAN SECTION 0 NU. | f"1[NS/D1I\j } By DA DE ____ NU I\ ~,j �� / ' `­__~-~ ~. ~- / / ` 11 ­777770S/ON REVS/ON BY | 0A TL Dmj ����------- DRAWN BY, JLC I_AK[ RIDGE PRELIMINARY PLAT _ � � DRAWING NUMB[ 9: C_7 �HF I-T NUM BER, 7 of 10 Albemarle County GIS -Web June 7, 2006 Overview of TMP 78 -57 Lake Ridge Subdivision with 10' Contours ❑ Tax Map Grid — Overview Roads ❑ Road Bridges Road Centerlines Roads Railroads ❑ Railroad Bridges — Elevation Contours (10 ft) ❑ Parcels Lakes and Reservoirs Ponds Major Streams Other Streams �� 11111 u � m �rR GIIS�t' Geographic Data Services Room 227 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 All data is provided for graphic representation only. The County of Albemarle expressly disclaims all warranties of any type, expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, any warranty as to the accuracy of the data, merchantability, or fitness for a particular purpose. Aerial Imagery © 2002 Commonwealth of Virginia - Maps are for internal use only. N