HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200800160 Review Comments Preliminary Site Plan 2008-08-20COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4012
August 29, 2008
Michael Barns
P. O. Box 5207
Charlottesville, VA 22905
RE: SUB200800160 Foot Hills Crossing - Preliminary
Dear Mr. Barnes:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on, August 19, 2008 approved the above -
noted petition, by a vote of 6:1.
Please note this approval was based on the following conditions:
1. The engineering review for current development needs to review and approve all applicable items as
specified in the Design Standards Manual, section 903, before recommending tentative approval to
the final subdivision plat.
2. Screening in accord with Section 32.7.9.8 shall be provided within the Open Space area between the
Connector Road and any lots backing on the Connector Road that are shallower than 350 feet.
3. Albemarle County Service Authority approval to include construction drawings for water service
infrastructure, meters, easements.
4. 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 location 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.
5. The applicant will have to submit road names for all roads to this office before final plat is approved.
Please contact this office for road name approval.
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
for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
The approval of the preliminary plat is valid for one (1) year in accordance with Subdivision Ordinance
Section 14- 221.A. Therefore, the preliminary approval shall expire on August 19, 2009. If the preliminary
plat approval expires, a new application must be filed and processed.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (434) 296 -5832.
Sincerely,
Gerald Gatobu
Senior Planner
Zoning and Current Development Division
Cc: Route 240 Holdings LLC C/O River Bend Management Inc
P O Box 520
Crozet, VA 22932
*-&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Gerald Gatobu, Current Development Project Planner
From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review
Date: 31 July 2008
Subject: Foothill Crossing Preliminary Plat (SUB- 2008 - 00160)
The first revision of the preliminary plat for Foothill Crossing has been reviewed. The following
comments are provided.
1. At the time of the expiration of the original preliminary plat for this project (SUB- 2006 - 00315),
the applicant had nearly approved road, ESC, SWM, and mitigation plans (WPO- 2007 -00044 and
SUB - 2006 - 00315). It appears that the alignment of the road and lot layout is exactly the same as
in the approved plans with the exception of the phase lines. There are no new ordinance text
amendments that would affect this subdivision plan.
(Rev. 1) The road plan, SWMplan, and associated easements on this preliminary plat do not
match the nearly approved set. The final plat should be drawn to the engineering documents
reviewed by engineering.
2. The critical slope disturbance shown on this plan will be considered exempt. [18- 4.2.6]
(Rev. 1) No change.
3. The applicant needs to correctly show the stream buffers on the plan. The stream buffer terminates
at the parcel's property line on the current plan
(Rev. 1) The buffer is not shown correctly adjacent to the northern conceptual SWM facility.
Please see the county GIS- Web application for the correct buffer location.
4. Not all of the required drainage easements are shown on the plan. (final plat comment)
(Rev. 1) No change.
5. All drainage easements should be sized using the equation in the design manual that is based on
the depth and size of the storm pipe. (final plat comment)
(Rev. 1) No change.
Engineering review has no objection to the approval of this preliminary plat.
File: E1_ppt_PBC_sub200800160
*-&A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Gerald Gatobu, Current Development Project Planner
From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review
Date: 15 July 2008
Subject: Foothill Crossing Preliminary Plat (SUB- 2008 - 00160)
The preliminary plat for Foothill Crossing has been reviewed. The following comments are provided.
1. At the time of the expiration of the original preliminary plat for this project (SUB- 2006 - 00315),
the applicant had nearly approved road, ESC, SWM, and mitigation plans (WPO- 2007 -00044 and
SUB - 2006 - 00315). It appears that the alignment of the road and lot layout is exactly the same as
in the approved plans with the exception of the phase lines. There are no new ordinance text
amendments that would affect this subdivision plan.
2. The critical slope disturbance shown on this plan will be considered exempt. [18- 4.2.6]
3. The applicant needs to correctly show the stream buffers on the plan. The stream buffer terminates
at the parcel's property line on the current plan
4. Not all of the required drainage easements are shown on the plan. (final plat comment)
5. All drainage easements should be sized using the equation in the design manual that is based on
the depth and size of the storm pipe. (final plat comment)
Engineering review has no objection to the approval of this preliminary plat.
File: El_ppt_PBC_sub200800160
pF AL
�'IRGIN��
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner, Current Development
FROM: Elaine Echols, Principal Planner for the Development Areas
SUBJECT: SUB 2008 -160 Foothill Crossing
DATE: July 14, 2008
Thank you for offering the opportunity to comment on the above referenced subdivision.
For SUB 2007 -47, Rebecca Ragsdale provided a letter recommending changes to the plat
for better conformity with the Crozet Master Plan. The applicant made a few changes;
however, the most substantive requests were not made and, as they could not be required,
the Planning Division did not request anything further. I found out this morning that the
preliminary plat expired and that the project was resubmitted for review and approval. I
would like to ask you to call the applicant's attention to three very important items for
consideration. The first item has to do with the Connector Road which will connect Rt.
240 to Rt. 250. Our Master Plan calls it the Eastern Connector.
On SUB 08 -160, the Eastern Connector is shown as a 36 foot wide street with bike lanes,
sidewalks, and planting strips for street trees. We appreciate the attention their firm has
paid to the width for bike lanes. Unfortunately, there is an area of "open space" between
the backs of the lots and the Connector Road, rather than having the houses "front" on the
Connector Road and be served by an alley. What will happen is that the rears of the
houses will face the street, which is not desirable design or form in the County's
development areas. The Eastern Connector is a very important street in Crozet's overall
street system and I would appeal to applicant's sense of good design for Crozet and ask
that he reconsider the arrangement proposed.
Secondly, there is the issue of interconnections. The proposed development provides
excellent external street connections on the north, south, east, and western parts of your
site. Internal to the development, though, there are five cul -de -sacs. The most
northeastern cul -de -sac makes tremendous sense adjacent to steep slopes and the
creekbed. The other cul -de -sacs, though, might be connected in a better block format and
still provide for the minimum 100 feet of lot width. I don't know whether their engineers
have attempted to do this or not. My guess is that, with the R -1 zoning, the engineers
have tried to maximize the number of building lots that can meet the minimum
requirements and providing for more of a "block" pattern will not provide the maximum
number of building lots given the lot requirements of the R -1 district. Whether it is
essential that the applicant maximize the number of building lots or whether they have
some "give" to allow for better design, I don't know. I do believe that it would be
beneficial to the development and the County to allow for more internal interconnections.
Since R -1 zoning does not provide a great deal of density anyway, I would recommend
design over density, if it comes down to that. Since the applicant will need to go to the
Planning Commission for approval of the open space, perhaps the Commission might
weigh in on their desires.
Finally, there is the issue of stream buffers. As you know, undisturbed stream buffers are
required adjacent to all streams in Crozet. As you also know, the County prefers to have
stream buffers in open space rather than on lots. We find that the buffers are protected
better when this occurs. Many homeowners don't realize that the property they own is
restricted from any disturbance by the County and the County doesn't find out the
homeowner didn't know until trees are cut down and erosion occurs. Although we can't
require it, we would prefer that stream buffers be placed in common open space.
Please provide these comments to the applicant with the County's review comments and
let me know if you need additional information.
Thanks.