Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202100070 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2022-09-08County of Albemarle COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 401 McIntire Road, North Wing -_ Charlottesville, VA22902-4579 MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Jeremy Fox Timmons Group 608 Preston Ave., Suite 200 Charlottesville, VA 22903 aeremy.fox@ti mmons.com FROM: Andy Reitelbach, Senior Planner II DATE: September 8, 2022 RE: SDP2021-00070 Old Trail Block 7C Final Site Plan; 3'd Review phone:434-296-5832 www.albemarle.org The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department of Community Development will recommend approval of the plan referred to above when the following items have been satisfactorily addressed. (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference to the Albemarle County Code.] Remaining comments from SDP2021-00036 are listed first. New comments from the review of SDP2021-00070 follow. Comments from SDP2021-00036 - Old Trail Block 7C Initial Site Plan Action Letter: The original comments from the review and action letter for SDP2021-00036 are in gray font. Follow-up comments from the review of the final site plan, SDP2021-00070, are in bolded black font. Please address these follow-up comments as well. 1. [32.5.2(a)] Subdivision and/or BLA plats will be required for any of the structures that are proposed to be located on individual parcels. These plats will require review and approval by CDD staff prior to their recordation at the courthouse. The plats must be in accordance with Chapter 14 of the County's Ordinances. Comment remains. 2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide more information on the open space parcel that is proposed to be adjusted along the west side of the property. Include this entire parcel on the site plan so that staff can ensure all regulations for this parcel will still be met with the proposed boundary line adjustment. This comment has not been addressed. The lot is being adjusted by significantly more square footage than 300 sq. ft. It appears that entire residential lots are being included in this area - Lot 45 and Lot 46. Staff recognizes that more information and clarity may be provided once the proposed subdivision plat has been submitted for review. Since parcel D1 is also being included in this development, it needs to be identified as such on the cover sheet, with all the appropriate information. Include parcel D1 in the parcel area section on the cover sheet, as there are proposed residential lots located in this area Comment addressed. 3. [32.5.2(b)] Provide on the cover sheet the gross residential density for both this phase of the development and for Block 7 overall. Comment not addressed. The overall gross density should be the total number of units in Block 7 divided by the total acreage amount of Block 7 (all phases), not the individual gross densities each added together. Comment addressed. 4. [32.5.2(b); 4.12.6] Parking. There is not sufficient parking provided for this development. As attached units with parking proposed on individual lots, there must be 1 guest space provided per 4 units. With 30 units proposed, a minimum of 8 guest spaces must be provided on the site. Update the parking schedule on the cover sheet to reflect these required spaces, and identify the locations of these guest spaces on the layout plan. In addition, several of the garages and driveways do not appear to meet the minimum dimensional requirements to count as required parking spaces. This comment has not been addressed. Guest parking spaces must be common areas, not on individual lots. Provide at least 8 parking spaces in common areas to allow for guest parking. Add these eight spaces to the parking schedule on the cover sheet Comment addressed. Provide dimensions for the garages and driveways. Staff cannot determine whether they meet the required minimum size to count for parking spaces. Provide widths for the driveways. It appears that garage widths were provided, but not for the driveways. Comment addressed. 5. [32.5.2(i)] Streets, easements, and travelways. a. Identify all proposed access easements. Access easements will require an approved plat. Easement plat is required. b. As the sidewalk and planting strip along Old Trail Drive is depicted outside of the right-of-way, it must have an access easement placed over it. Comment still applies. Easements have to be platted. Depicting them on a site plan only is not sufficient. This easement will also require approval by VDOT. 6. [32.5.2(n)] Existing and proposed improvements. a. Confirm the width and length of each driveway and each garage. To count as required parking spaces, there must be at least 9 feet of width provided for each space. In addition, there must be at least 18 feet in length provided for each space, either in the garage or for the driveway (outside of the right-of-way line). Several driveways (e.g., Lots 40-43) and garages do not appear to meet the minimum requirements and cannot count for required parking spaces. The widths of the driveways do not appear to be labelled on the layout plan. Although driveway widths have been provided, driveways of 16 feet in width do not meet parking requirements for two spaces. Such driveways must be at least 18 feet. A 16-ft. wide driveway accommodates only one parking space. Revise the parking schedule on the cover sheet to reflect that most driveways accommodate only one parking space. Or otherwise widen the driveways to 18 feet b. Identify the front setbacks for Lots 47-56. As amenity -oriented lots, their front setbacks must be measured from the open space. The front setbacks of lots 47-56 have not been identified. The front setback for these lots is measured from the open space. I do not see a label or line identifying these setbacks on any plan sheet. The 25' maximum line must be measured from the edge of the open space parcel (the boundary line between the open space and the lots), not from Orion Lane. Comment addressed. 7. [32.5.2(o)] Identify all areas proposed to be dedicated to public use, and identify the entity (VDOT, the County. etc.) to which those areas will be dedicated. The dedication will require a plat or plats. Comment still applies. Plat required. 8. [32.5.20); 32.5.2 (k)] Label all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm drainage easements by type and include a size/width measurement. For existing easements, state the deed book and page of the recorded instrument. For proposed easements, an easement plat will need to be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded at the courthouse prior to approval of the final site plan being granted. Commentstill applies. Plat required for all new easements. 9. [32.5.2 (q] Label all existing and proposed utility easements by type and include a size/width measurement. For existing easements, state the deed book and page of the recorded instrument. For proposed easements, an easement plat will need to be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded at the courthouse prior to approval of the final site plan being granted. Comment still applies. Plat required for all new easements. 10. [32.5.2(p); 32.7.9] A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 of the Zoning Ordinance must be submitted with the final site plan. With site plan review now occurring along this section of Old Trail Drive, street trees will need to be provided in the strip along Old Trail Drive. Update the planting schedule. It appears there are eight trees along Old Trail Drive and 36 trees total on the site plan. This comment has not been addressed. The planting schedule continues to say that there are seven trees provided, when there are eight shown on the plan. This discrepancy needs to be fixed. It is always preferred that street trees are located in the public right-of-way. If, however, some trees are situated outside of the public right-of-way, they will need to be located within an easement (with appropriate maintenance agreements) prior to approval of the site plan/subdivision plat. Comment still applies. 11. [General Comment] The HOA documents and other maintenance agreements for Old Trail will need to be revised to include this phase of development and any improvements that will be commonly owned by the HOA. Comment still applies. However, the ordinance has been updated, and this requirement can be accomplished by adding a note onto the plat, instead of preparing and providing separate documents. The required language for this note will be provided in final review of the subdivision plat. Please contact Andy Reitelbach in the Department of Community Development at areitelbach@albemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext. 3261 for further information. Comments from Other Reviewing Departments and Agencies Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) Emily Cox, ecox2(�_)albemarle.org - Requested changes; see the comment below: 1) Tree along Fennel Road, between Lot 35 and the open space parcel, should not be located in public drainage easement. Albemarle County Fire -Rescue (ACFR) Howard Lagomarsino, hlagomarsino@albemarle.org - No objections at this time.