HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201000013 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2010-03-10P I'' illy IIII�.
COUNTY -OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
MEMORANDUM
TO: Summer Frederick, Senior Planner
Philip Custer, Engineer pp
FROM: Elaine K. Echols, Principal Planner
DATE: March 10, 2010 (replaces earlier March memo)
`SUBJECT: ZMA 2004 -22 and SDP 2010 -13 Treesdale Park Final Site Plan
We have reviewed the site plan referenced above and noted that the tree preservation area has been impacted
slightly more than what was approved on the preliminary site plan. As you know, staff received an email from
Collins Engineering on January 7, 2010 indicating that the design of the three tier wall system approved on the
preliminary site plan was becoming very problematic with the geo -grid design. Scott Collins said that, as they
tried to stay away from the preservation area, the geo -grid was doubled up under the multiple wall system, and
extending into the foundation of the buildings, creating serious concerns about the integrity of the walls once
constructed in the field. He said that if the geo -grid was not installed properly or cut with the installation of the
foundation and other walls, this could lead to structural failure of the wall system. He also said that there
needed to be space for construction of the buildings and having enough room for access and maintenance of the
exterior of the buildings. He wanted to design an access route behind building 4 to give access to the back areas
behind buildings 3 and 4 for construction purposes. These changes would result in grading that extended
further than the area approved on the preliminary site plan.
In February after provision of alternate designs by Collins Engineering and William Park, Wayne Cilimberg
-reviewed the attached plan for .conformity with prior variation approvals. He said that the small additional area
being disturbed for the 3- tiered retaining walls was sufficiently in keeping with his prior approvals. He made
this decision because the need to extend the grading past the area shown on the preliminary site plan would still
result in a multi- tiered retaining wall with appropriate wall heights. Please note that the attached plan also
shows an additional area for tree preservation which the applicant is providing.
The conditions of the November 4, 2009 variation for disturbance of the tree preservation area were as follows:
A variation to approve disturbance of the tree preservation area on the south side: of the site is approved
because the area a.d, a.cerd to it. is currently undeveloped. 'the variation is approved on the condition that a.
lands rape -plan is submitted with the final site plat and plantings are made in accordance with that landscape
plan. The result shouid;be -hea r}t ietat nn wer time a ba. ooa ;are w
Accordingly, the applicant will need to amend his proposed landscape plan to add shrubbery and trees in the
locations shown here:
f
n
With regards to critical slopes disturbance, Current Development makes the call relative to whether any
additional review by the Planning Commission is needed. I understand they have determined that the
disturbance shown on the final site plan is covered by the Commission's prior action to approve the critical
slopes.
I hope that this memo allows you to continue with your review of the site development plan for this -project. If
you have questions or need additional information, please let me know.
2