HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201200013 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2012-09-27Brent Nelson
From: Brent Nelson
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 4:55 PM
To: 'Rob Cummings'
Subject: RE: SP201200013, Kenridge Amendment, Staff Comments
I am sending this email as a follow up to our phone conversation regarding these revisions. I circulated your revised
proposal to staff and received the following comments.
Entrance Corridor
The following comments /questions related to the Entrance Corridor Guidelines have been provided by Margaret
Maliszewski:
1. The use of the phrase, "as they currently exist" is odd and confusing and doesn't seem necessary. Please delete
each instance.
2. In #3, clarify that "detached residences" does not include the cottage.
3. Revise #6 to clarify that ARB review is limited to Zone A. It is recommended that "Design Planner" be revised to
"Director of Planning or designee" or some similar language.
Zoning
The following comments /questions related to the zoning matters have been provided by Ron Higgins:
1. - Previous comment has been addressed regarding the proposed wording of the new condition #9.
-To elaborate on the previous violation comment: This started with a citizen complaint in November, 2011 about a
unit wall built without the required use of brick as called for in condit. #9. That unit ( #19) was built between June
and November of 2011. After taking time to determine if this was actually a violation of the condition and if other
elements were also in violation (we discovered three other interior facing units being built that way), we began
working with the builder to arrive at a solution/correction. The builder was cooperative and met with individual
owners in the development, identifying other items they also wanted to address in the SP amendment.
-After that, progress toward a resolution began to stall in May, 2012, so we issued a Notice of Violation for the use
of material other than brick on the exterior walls in violation of condition #9 of the SP. This got the process
moving again and re- focused the SP on the violation issue.
-In the mean time we have issued subsequent building permits for units that comply with the condition.
-The applicant has agreed to bond corrections and get consent from owners prior to issuance of further COs if it
becomes necessary.
Planning
The following comments related to planning matters have been provided by Brent Nelson:
1. White siding should be further defined to specify material.
Please contact me should you have any questions.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services
Department of Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
434 - 296 -5832 x3438
From: Rob Cummings [mailto: rob(fthals. net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:48 PM
To: Brent Nelson
Subject: Re: SP201200013, Kenridge Amendment, Staff Comments
Brent,
I hope is well.
The attached PDF I believe best addresses the County's concerns and comments regarding Kenridge. After reading the
comments and suggestions I believe we have it nailed. If at all possible can we meet to discuss at your convenience. The
more staff members the better if it helps. I can make myself available pretty much anytime this week again at your
convenience.
Thanks as I look forward.
Rob
- - - - - -- Original Message- - - - - --
From: Brent Nelson
Date: 8/30/2012 5:32:01 PM
To: Rob Cummings
Cc: Margaret Maliszewski; David Benish; Ron Higgins
Subject: SP201200013, Kenridge Amendment, Staff Comments
Rob,
Attached you should find the staff review letter for the above -noted proposal. A hard copy of the letter, with
attachments, is in the mail to you. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services
Department of Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
434 - 296 -5832 x3438