HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201200003 Request of Modification, Variance, Waiver 2013-07-10pE A
YlAGIl`11A
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Yaniglos, Planning Review
From: Michelle Roberge, Engineering Review
Date: 18 Jul 2013
Subject: Out of Bounds; Critical Slope Waiver Request (ZMA- 2012 - 00003)
The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed and I recommend the disturbance of critical slopes.
The engineering analysis of the request follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The critical slopes proposed as being disturbed are man -made slopes that were created when the existing
dry pond at the rear of site was constructed. The applicant is requesting to disturb these critical slopes for a
subdivision development with a maximum of 56 residential units.
Areas
Acres
Total site
9.42 acres approximately
Critical slopes
.09
0.100
Critical slopes disturbed
.09
100%
The disturbance of critical slopes shown is exempt from the critical slopes waivers under the
Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance Section 4.2.6. The existing topography has approximately
1/3 of site draining north and 2/3 of site draining south to a low spot, which is then bordered by the
critical slopes. Engineering recommends approval of the critical slope waiver provided that
adequate stormwater management is proposed at or near the critical slopes area. Engineering has
also previously recommended a stormwater basin, but the applicant wishes to pursue providing
underground detention facilities. Engineering has requested that the applicant provide an adequate
channel analysis prior to the approval of ZMA201200003.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2:
"movement of soil and rock"
Construction will consist of compacted fill and erosion control measures shall be installed in
accordance with the water protection ordinance to prevent large scale erosion. Proper slope
construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of soil.
"excessive stormwater runoff'
The proposed stormwater facilities are three underground detention systems located north and south
of site. Prior to the approval of ZMA201200003, Engineering has recommended for the applicant to
determine if existing pipes downstream can handle existing runoff plus the additional runoff from
the proposed development.
"siltation"
Albemarle County Community Development
Engineering Review comments
Page 2 of 2
Inspection and bonding by the County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper
stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability. Engineering staff will only approve a
plan compliant with state standards.
"loss of aesthetic resource"
This proposal is to provide a high density subdivision within an area designated for such use. This
application also proposes the preservation of a historic home on 0.68 acres, Block 2, along an
Albemarle County entrance corridor.
"septic effluent"
The proposed site will not release any septic effluent to the surrounding environment. The site is
serviced by public sewer.
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
()'Al
r
�IRGIS
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Memorandum
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
To:
Megan Yaniglos
From:
Michelle Roberge, Engineering Department
Division:
Engineering
Date:
Jul 17, 2013
Subject:
ZMA 2012 -00003 Out of Bounds
RE: Request for Private Street Authorization and Waiver of Street Standards Dated July 10, 2013
I have reviewed the request for private streets and waiver of street standards for the application noted above.
1) The request for private street authorization for road "A" and road "B" sites Albemarle County Subdivision
Ordinance Section 14- 233A.1.(iii). Analysis of each subsection of the ordinance follows:
i. the subdivision would have streetscape more consistent with the
neighborhood model;
Road "A" meets the planting strip and sidewalk requirement under Albemarle County
Subdivision Ordinance Section 14 -422 A. Road "B" will have rear access to each lot, but
sidewalk and landscaping are provided in the front of lots to be consistent with the neighbor
model.
ii. The subdivision design would allow it to better achieve the density
goals of the comprehensive plan;
The proposed development is a high density subdivision and it appears that sidewalks provide
pedestrian circulation throughout the site. Also, all lots are adjacent to a sidewalk that provides
access to amenities, which adheres to the neighborhood model of a walk -able community.
iii. Rear vehicular access to buildings would be provided so that buildings
may face a common amenity;
Only road "B" is providing rear vehicular access to meet criteria. However, road "A" has lots on
one side. These lots abut a proposed open space at the rear and sidewalks on both sides of
road "A" are provided to access common amenities.
iv. a significant environmental resource would be protected;
The total area of site is 9.42 acres. Block 2 will be preserved, but only account for 7% of the
site. Also, the proposed configuration for site is a high density development; which requires
clearing the majority of site. Therefore, a significant environmental resource would not be
protected. This would be the case with or without the waiver. There are existing critical slopes
within the project area, but only account for less than 1 % of project site.
2) The applicant requests the following items waived:
a) The applicant requests to waive the requirements for curb, gutter, and sidewalk for road "B" since
road serves as a rear access (and frontage) for units 30 -55; while sidewalks and street trees are
provided at the front of the units.
1
I recommend the sidewalk waived, but curb and gutter should be provided. This area is
considered to be the low point of site. Many discussions have occurred on how SWM will be
handled to avoid any overflow to adjacent properties. It appears that an inverted crown may be
proposed if curb and gutter is waived, but engineering has found it does not work well in
subdivisions and it is difficult to construct.
b) The applicant requests to waive the requirement for sidewalk east side of Georgetown Road
Extended.
Per my response in 1.ii above, engineering recommends approval.
c) The applicant requests to waive the requirements for a planting strip on the north side and south
side of Bennington Road Extended, between Westminster Road and Georgetown Road
Extended.
Due to topography and the space constraint, as road is proposed to go through two residential
lots, engineering recommends approval of waiver.
d) The applicant requests to waive the requirements for a sidewalk on the south side of Bennington
Road Extended, between Westminster Road and Georgetown Road Extended.
Due to topography and the space constraint, as road is proposed to go through two residential
lots, engineering recommends approval of waiver.
3) For road "B ", the applicant requests a waiver for section 14- 412(A) -3(b) by providing a 20' wide road
without curb and gutter and a 12' x 80' hammerhead turnaround.
Engineering recommends denial of 20' road without curb and gutter. Engineering recommends at
least 24' wide road with enforcement procedures for no parking on both sides of road. The 12 x80'
hammerhead is adequate.
4) The applicant requests a waiver for sidewalk and planting strips on both sides of road "B ", Bennington
Road Extended, and Georgetown Road Extended.
Engineering recommends approval of waiver for road `B" since it will serve as a rear access to
lots only. Sidewalk and trees are provided in front of lots. Engineering also sees no issues with
Bennington Road Extended and Georgetown Road Extended, per my response in I. ii above, and
recommends approval.
Please contact Michelle Roberge in the Engineering Dept at mroberge(c�albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext.
3458 for further information.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SHIM CIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
ENGINEERINGa
July 10, 2013
Ms. Megan Yaniglos
Senior Planner
Albemarle County
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Regarding: ZMA201200003 Out of Bounds
Request for Private Street Authorization
Request for Waiver of Street Standards
Dear Ms. Yaniglos,
Several provisions are included in the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance that will allow the
commission and agent to waive certain requirements that will permit creative design alternatives that would
"...accomplish county goals, policies, good planning practice and good engineering practice."
With this in mind, and in conjunction with the referenced rezoning (ZMA 201200003 Out of Bounds), we
request the following:
1) In accordance with Section 14 -233 (A), the Applicant requests authorization from the commission to
develop a subdivision with two new private streets (Road "A" and Road "B" as delineated on the Out
of Bounds Application Plan) in the following circumstances:
"Neighborhood model development. The proposed private streets would enable the principles of the
neighborhood model to be more fully implemented than could be achieved with a public street, without
diminishing other principles of the neighborhood model, in the following circumstances: (i) the subdivision
would have a streetscape more consistent with the neighborhood model; (ii) the subdivision design would
allow it to better achieve the density goals of the comprehensive plan; (iii) rear vehicular access to
buildings would be provided so that the buildings may face a common amenity; (iv) a significant
environmental resource would be protected; or (v) relegated parking would be provided to a greater extent
than could otherwise be provided."
2) In accordance with Section 14- 225.1, the Applicant requests a waiver, for "Private Road B ",
"Bennington Road Extended ", and "Georgetown Road Extended" as delineated on the Out of Bounds
Application Plan, of Section 14- 410(H):
"Curb, curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. In the development areas, streets shall be constructed
with curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. Sidewalks and planting strips shall design and
constructed in compliance with section 14- 422."
In the case of "Private Road B ", the Applicant requests to waive the requirement for curbs, gutter,
and sidewalk since Road B serves as a rear access (and frontage) for units 30 -55; while sidewalks
and street trees are provided on the fronts of the units.
In the case of Georgetown Road Extended, the Applicant requests to waive the requirement for a
sidewalk on the east side of the road. No residential units front on the east side of Georgetown Road
Extended and the existing trees, along with new street trees, will create a buffer (as requested by the
neighbors in the adjacent Canterbury Hills). In the case of Bennington Road Extended, the Applicant
requests to waive the requirement for a planting strip on the north side of the road between
Westminster Road and Georgetown Road Extended; and the Applicant wishes to waive the
requirement for a sidewalk and planting strip on the south side of the road between Westminster
Road and Georgetown Road Extended. In this request, sidewalks do not exist in the adjoining
Canterbury Hills, minimum width is available for grading, and existing mature trees exist which can
be saved by eliminating the 17 feet of cross - section required for two planting strips and one sidewalk.
3) In accordance with Section 14- 224.1, the Applicant requests a waiver, for Road `B" as delineated on
the Out of Bounds Application Plan, of Section 14- 412(A) -3(b):
"Private streets in the development areas. For such private streets in the development areas, the agent may
approve Virginia Department of Transportation standards for mountainous terrain or an alternative standard
deemed adequate by the county engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the
design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare."
In the case of Road "B ", the Applicant would like to waive the requirement for a traditional turn-
around and provide a narrow (20 ft. section without curb and gutter) street. The length of road,
measured from the intersection of Georgetown Road Extended, is 350 ft. and a 12 ft by 80 ft
hammerhead is provided at the western end of the road. The applicant would like to provide a 20 ft.
road section (without curb) with the understanding that there will be no on- street parking and a
minimum of two off - street parking spaces are provided at each residential unit.
4) In accordance with Section 14- 225.1, the Applicant requests a waiver, for "Private Road B ",
Bennington Road Extended, and Georgetown Road Extended as delineated on the Out of Bounds
Application Plan, of Section 14- 422(A):
"Requirement. Sidewalks and planting strips for street trees and other vegetation shall be established on both
sides of each new street within a subdivision creating lots for single family detached and single family attached
dwellings in the development areas."
Please see paragraph 2 above for justification of this requirement.
As always if you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at (434)
207 -8086 and we can discuss in further detail.
Best Regards,
Justin Shimp, P.E.
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
Cc: Vito Cetta, AIA
Out of Bounds
(ZMA201200003)
Critical Slopes Waiver Request
ZMA Application Attachment
TM P: 06000 -00 -00 -06500
Date: May 201h, 2013
Request:
In conjunction with a request to rezone a 9.42 -acre portion of TMP 060 -00 -00 -06500 from R -1
(Residential) to NMD (Neighborhood Model District) to allow a maximum of 56 residential units, the
Applicant requests a waiver of Section 4.2 (Critical Slopes) of the Albemarle County to allow
disturbance of slopes greater than 25 %.
Specifics of Request:
The slopes in question are man -made slopes created by the construction of an existing dry
pond at the rear of the site.
The area of critical slopes is thirty -eight hundred and fifty square feet (0.09 acres) and
represents less than 1% of the 9.42 acre site.
The proposed development re- establishes a level grade in this area and a new storm
water management system shall be installed underground to manage runoff from the
development.
The primary concerns with development on critical slopes are addressed as follows:
Rapid or Large Scale Movements of Rock and Soil: Construction will consist of
compacted fill and erosion control measures shall be installed in accordance with the
water protection ordinance to prevent large scale erosion.
Excessive Storm Water Runoff. The proposed construction will provide new water
quality measures and new or upgraded adequate channels from the new development to
the stormwater management facility. Both the water quality treatment and improved
channels represent an improvement to the current conditions at the site. These measures
will protect against any increase in runoff.
Siltation of Natural or Man Made Bodies of Water: As outlined above, all development
shall be subject to the current standards of the County Water Protection Ordinance and
erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed to prevent siltation of water
bodies.
Loss of Aesthetic Resource: This proposal is to provide neighborhood density residential
and commercial development within an area of Albemarle County designated for such a
use. This application also proposes the preservation of an existing homesite on 1.62
acres along an Albemarle County entrance corridor.
As this development is served by public sewer, there are no concerns related to sewer
effluent.
In summary, the reasons for the request are to allow disturbance of manmade slopes of 25% or
greater for the purposes of constructing a new neighborhood with an adequate storm water
management facility that will efficiently use land within the growth area for the purposes of
promoting neighborhood density development and allow for the preservation of a 1950's era
homesite along the Barracks Road Entrance Corridor.
Prepared and submitted on behalf of the Applicant by:
Justin Shimp, P.E.
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
201 E. Main Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434) 207 -8086
Megan Yaniglos
From: Austin, Nathran. (VDOT) [Nathran .Austin @vdot.virginia.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:25 AM
To: Vito Cetta
Cc: Megan Yaniglos; Glenn Brooks; Seale, Dennis L. (VDOT); Barron, L. Marshall (VDOT)
Subject: RE: Out Of Bounds
Mr. Cetta,
I appreciate the fact that not all of the existing residents in the area may want to see this connection made, but please
be advised that VDOT finds this connectivity to be important to the your project as well as to the existing residents in the
area. The street connection will make a signalized intersection available to the existing residents where it currently is
not available. I believe it to be just as likely, if not more likely, that many of the existing residents will travel through Out
of Bounds development to access the signalized intersection. This connection has been anticipated since at least 1963
when the plat and deed for Section Three of Canterbury Hills was recorded, establishing the right -of -way for the
extension of Bennington Road to the property that presently is being proposed to be developed as Out of Bounds.
In addition to the above discussion, there is a requirement in Chapter 92 of the Code of Virginia, Secondary Street
Acceptance Requirements (SSAR) for multiple connections in multiple directions. This requirement can be found under
24VAC30- 92 -60. Public benefit requirements, C. Connectivity requirements, item 2. This requirement states "The streets
within a network addition may be accepted into the secondary system of state highways if the network addition
provides at least two external connections, one of which must be to a publicly maintained highway and the other
providing a connection to a different highway or a stub out to an adjoining property." I can waive this requirement if
one or more of the following situations makes this 2nd connection impracticable:
a. "The adjoining property is completely built out, its state is such that redevelopment within 20 years is unlikely,
and there is no stub out (either constructed or platted) to the property served by the network addition ". Since
there is platted and recorded right -of -way for this connection, I don't believe that this situation applies.
b. "The adjoining property is zoned for a use whose traffic is incompatible with the development being served by
the network addition, providing, however, that in no case shall retail, residential, or office uses be considered
incompatible with other retail, residential, or office uses ". Since both the existing and proposed developments
are residential in nature, I don't believe that this situation applies.
c. "there is no reasonable connection possible to adjoining property or adjacent highways due to a factor outside
the control of the developer of the network addition, such as the presence of conservation easements not put in
place by the developer of the network addition, water features such as rivers or lakes, jurisdictional wetlands,
grades in excess of 15% whose total elevation change is greater than five feet, limited access highways,
railroads, or government property to which access is restricted ". I know that there have been discussions about
the ability to make the connection with 25' radii and the ability to have a sidewalk along the connector due to
the available right -of -way. I'm not sure that I agree that these requirements can't be met, but those are
discussions that we can have. Upon visiting the site, I found no limitations due to the topography that would
prevent this connection from being constructed.
At this time, I cannot support this project proceeding as a subdivision with streets that would be accepted into the State
Highway system without the extension of Bennington Road to the Out of Bounds development. I would be glad to meet
with you, your engineer, and County staff to discuss this matter further.
Troy Austin, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Virginia Department of Transportation
Land Development — South
Culpeper District
P.O. Box 1017