HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201000022 Legacy Document 2010-06-01ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SDP2010 -22- Hollymeade
Staff: Elizabeth M. Marotta, Senior Planner
Town Center Apartments- Critical Slopes
Amy Pflaum, Senior Engineer
Waiver
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
May 18, 204-0 (cancelled)
Not applicable
June 8, 2010
Owners: Uptown Village LLC
Applicant: Scott Collins, Collins Engineering, and
United Land Corporation of America
Acreage: Total parcel acreage: 33.075 acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
Project area acreage: 9.193 acres
Special Use Permit for: Not applicable
TMP: Tax Map 32 Parcel 56
By -right use: R -15 Residential [per ZMA1992 -14
Location: Towncenter Drive, across from its
and SP1993 -13], AIA Airport Impact Area
intersection with Augusta Lane [private]
Magisterial District: Rio
Proffers /Conditions: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Lots: 1 lot, 172
DA — X RA—
units
Proposal: Disturbance of 0.186 acres (8,102
Comp. Plan Designation: Urban Density in the
square feet)of man -made critical slopes to
Hollymead Community Area, with a secondary
allow development of a 7- building, 172 -unit,
landuse of Parks and Greenways
multi-family project.
Character of Property: Wooded and
Use of Surrounding Properties: Mobile home
cleared; undeveloped
park across Towncenter Drive (on the same parcel
though) to the south; proposed Willow Glen (232
dwelling units) adjacent to the north and east;
undeveloped parcel to the west.
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable:
1. Slopes created from a stockpile
1. None identified
2. Disturbance facilitates development in
accord with Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of request to disturb 0.186 acres of man -made
critical slopes.
STAFF PERSON: Elizabeth M. Marotta, Senior Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION: May 18, 2010 (cancelled)
June 8, 2010
AGENDA TITLE: SDP2010 -22: Hollymeade Town Center Apartments- Critical
Slopes Waiver
APPLICANT: Scott Collins, Collins Engineering
United Land Corporation of America
PROPERTY OWNER(S): Uptown Village, LLC
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
Disturb 0.186 acres of man-made critical slopes to allow development of a 7- building, 172 -unit multi-
family project in the development area.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Urban Density in Hollymead Community Area,
with a secondary landuse of Parks and Greenways.
REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
Approval of modification of Section 18.4.2.3.2 to allow disturbance of critical slopes.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
This parcel has a long history, as the southern half of the parcel (the portion of the site south of
Towncenter Drive) is the site of the Forest Springs Mobile Home Park and many of the parcels in the
immediate area are affected by numerous rezonings and special use permits associated with that use and
the mobile home sales office use. The only applications that apply to this request are SP1992 -14 and
ZMA 1992 -14.
SP1992 -14 has conditions associated with it, but the conditions all apply to the use of a mobile home
park and none of them pertain to the development of this portion of the site as a multi - family
development.
ZMA1992 -14 has proffers attached to it, and they will be addressed with the preliminary site plan.
[Conditions attached to the preliminary site plan SDP2010 -22 (Attachment B) are incorrect.]
CRITICAL SLOPES MODIFICATION:
The request for a modification has been reviewed for both the Engineering and Planning aspects of the
critical slopes regulations. Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth- disturbing activity on
critical slopes, while Section 4.2.5(a) allows the Planning Commission to waive this restriction. The
applicant has submitted a request and justification for the waiver [Attachment A], and staff has analyzed
this request to address the provisions of the ordinance.
2
Critical slopes cover approximately 0.413 acres of the total project area (9.193 acres), or approximately
0.04 percent of the total project area. This request is to disturb 0.186 acres, or approximately 0.02
percent, of the 9.193 -acre project site area. The requested critical slopes to be disturbed appear to be
man -made. Staff has reviewed this waiver request with consideration for the concerns that are set forth
in Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled "Critical Slopes."
A request to allow disturbance of critical slopes must be reviewed in accord with the requirements of
Section 4.2.5. This section requires a two part analysis. Section 4.2.5(a) is a review of the technical
performance standards. If these technical standards are not met the disturbance of critical slopes cannot
be approved by the Planning Commission.
If these technical standards are met the Planning Commission may then consider the disturbance of
critical slopes. The criteria for the Planning Commission's review of the disturbance of critical slopes
are found in Section 4.2.5(b). Staff presents the analysis of the request to disturb critical slopes in two
parts.
Section 4.2.5(a)
Review of the technical performance standards.:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The critical slope areas on the site appear to contain both natural and man-made slopes. The proposed
disturbance is limited to man -made slopes.
The critical slope disturbances are in the form of:
Areas
Acres
Total site area
9.193
Area of critical slopes
(man-made & natural)
Man -made = 0.186
Natural = 0.227
% of development= 0.020%
% of development= 0.024%
Total critical slopes area
0.413
% of development= 0.044%
Total critical slopes disturbed
0.186
% of critical slopes= 45%
Below, each of the concerns of Zoning Ordinance section 18 -4.2 is addressed:
1. "rapid and/or large scale movement of soil and rock ": The areas of critical slope
disturbance are presumed to be fill area from previous development in the area. Large scale
movement of soil and rock is not anticipated to occur as a result of this construction.
2. "excessive stormwater run - off": Although it does not affect the critical slopes disturbance,
the proposed stormwater management facility appears to conflict with a future road
connection from the approved Willow Glen development to Towncenter Drive. Regardless,
excessive stormwater run -off in the area of critical slopes can be limited by site design that
minimizes or terraces runs of steep slopes (2:1). Proposed Building #6 has been designed as
a "split- level" with a 10 -foot step differential to accommodate the existing topography as
much as possible. Adjacent Building #5, although not directly located on the area of critical
slopes, is only proposed with a 2 -foot step differential, creating the need for a 16 -foot vertical
2:1 fill slope behind it. It is recommended that this building be designed with a greater step
differential, if possible, to shorten this 2:1 slope or that the 2:1 slope be terraced with areas of
flatter grade.
3. "siltation of natural and man -made bodies of water ": A natural stream runs along the
northern boundary of this parcel and needs to be adequately protected from construction
activities. Grading and fill activity in close proximity to proposed Woodland Preservation
areas appears to leave inadequate room for Erosion & Sediment Control measures to properly
protect the site. It is unlikely that perimeter control measures can be installed without
impacting the preservation areas. It is recommended that more distance be given between the
back of Buildings 5 and 6 and the Preservation area, consequently reducing the amount of
acreage in the Preservation area and impacting the bonus density. With enough space
provided to install them, proposed E &S measures are anticipated to reduce sediment -laden
runoff from leaving the site. Inspection and bonding by the County will monitor
maintenance of the erosion control facilities during construction. Proper stabilization and
maintenance will achieve long term stability.
4. "loss of aesthetic resource": The site plan shows the critical slopes to be within a "wooded
area of hardwood trees." The disturbance of these critical slopes involves the removal of this
existing vegetation.
5. "septic effluent ": The existing subdivision is served by public sewer and there are no septic
drainfields within the area of this disturbance.
This site does not drain into a waterway that is a public drinking water supply for Albemarle County.
No portion of this site plan is located inside the 100 -year flood plain area according to FEMA Maps,
dated 04 February 2005.
Based on the above review, the applicant can satisfactorily address the technical criteria for the
disturbance of critical slopes with the Final Grading and Erosion Control Plan, provided that sufficient
area is provided for perimeter controls. Also, terracing should be considered in areas of long steep
slopes. Accomplishment of these may result in the loss of some of the proposed Preservation area.
Section 4.2.5(a)(3)
Recommendations on the findings that must be made by the Planning Commission in order to
allow disturbance of critical slopes.
The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that:
A. Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of this chapter or
otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare;
Strict application of the requirements of Section 4.2 would severely limit the development of this site. The
critical slopes are located in the middle of the site (see Attachment Q. In order to develop and make full
use of this site, disturbance of these critical slopes is necessary. Allowing disturbance of the critical slopes
will facilitate the construction of a multi - family residential project within the development areas. Efficient
use of the development areas furthers the Comprehensive Plan's primary landuse of Urban Density in this
area.
B. Alternatives proposed by the developer or subdivider would satisfy the intent and purposes of section 4.2
to at least an equivalent degree;
The developer or subdivider has not proposed any alternatives that would satisfy the intent and purposes
of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree.
4
C. Due to the property's unusual size, topography, shape, location or other unusual conditions, excluding
the proprietary interest of the developer or subdivider, prohibiting the disturbance of critical slopes
would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or would result in significant
degradation of the property or adjacent properties; or
This portion of the property is undeveloped, however it appears that some clearing was done in this area a
number of years ago. The critical slopes in question may have been created as an off -site stockpile and
debris area. Because of the location of the critical slopes, any development of the northern half of the
project area would require disturbance of the slopes; however, prohibiting the disturbance of critical
slopes would not effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property as the southern half
of the project area would still be developable. And, the southern half of the parcel (south of Towncenter
Drive) could still be used as a mobile home park.
No adjacent properties would be affected by disturbance of these slopes.
The county engineer has reviewed the proposed project and has deemed that an approved soil and erosion
control plan would address all potential runoff and siltation issues associated with disturbance of critical
slopes.
Approving the waiver would not be detrimental to the orderly development of the area and would not
result in significant degradation of the property or adjacent properties; conversely approval of the waiver
would further County goals to promote development in development areas and further the Comprehensive
Plan goal to promote urban density development in this area.
D. Granting the modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be served
by strict application of the regulations sought to be modified or waived.
This property is zoned R -15 Residential within the County's Development Areas. It's Comprehensive
Plan landuse recommendation is Urban Density, with a secondary landuse of Parks and Greenways. It is
currently an undeveloped site, although the southern half of the parcel (below Towncenter Drive) is
developed with a mobile home park. Public policy supports the proposal to further develop the site in a
manner consistent with the use of Urban Density, and a multi - family development fits into that
recommendation. The Comprehensive Plan also recommends projects on land with critical slopes adapt
the project design to the topography and natural setting, however the subject critical slopes are not
naturally occurring- they are there as a result of a soil stockpile.
The proposal to allow disturbance of critical slopes for a multi - family project is consistent with the zoning
in place, as well as public policy which encourages dense development in this area. Permitting
disturbance of these critical slopes does not violate Comprehensive Plan recommendations to protect
natural resources or terrain.
As discussed above, the critical slopes proposed to be disturbed were man -made, and approximately half
of the site has been disturbed by clearing. Therefore, granting the waiver, thus enabling the development
of the proposed multi - family project, may be considered as supporting some County objectives.
SUMMARY:
Staff review has resulted in both favorable and unfavorable findings:
Favorable factors:
1. The slopes to be disturbed are clearly man -made and were likely the result of an old stockpile.
2. The property is located within the development areas, and its Comprehensive Plan
recommendation is to be developed as Urban Density. Allowing disturbance of critical slopes
furthers County land use objectives.
Unfavorable factors:
1. None identified.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff opinion is that the favorable factors outweigh the unfavorable factors. Staff recommends
approval of this critical slopes waiver, provided that sufficient perimeter controls are provided for
with the Final Grading and Erosion Control Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Applicant Justification
B. Proposed preliminary site plan dated 3 -8 -10
6