HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201100033 Legacy Document 2011-07-06ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SDP201100033 Dunlora Forest-
Staff: Megan Yaniglos- Senior Planner; Max
Preliminary Site Plan
Greene- Engineering Tech
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
July 12, 2011
Not applicable
Owners: Rock Creek Properties, LLC
Applicant: Keith Lancaster, Southern
Development
Acreage: 22.3 acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
Special Use Permit for: Not applicable
TMP: Tax Map 62F Parcel A; Tax Map 61 Parcel
By -right use: R4- Residential- 4 units per acre
166; Tax Map 62D Parcel 1 A
standard level, and 6 units per acre bonus level;
Location: [Attachment B] On the Northeast corner
R6- Residential- 6 units per acre standard level, 9
at the intersection of Rio Road [Route 631 ] and
units per acre bonus level.
Pen Park Road [Route 768]
Magisterial District: Rio
Proffers /Conditions: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Lots: 93
DA— X RA—
Proposal: Request for preliminary approval of 93
Comp. Plan Designation: Neighborhood Density
units, including townhouses, single family, and
Residential- residential (3 -6 units /acre);
duplexes at a density of 4.16 units per acre.
supporting uses such as religious institutions,
Associated with this proposal are requests for a
schools, and other small -scale non - residential
disturbance of critical slopes and bonus density
uses in Neighborhood 2
increase for more units per acre than is allowed
with the standard level development required for
R4 zoning.
Character of Property: Wooded with three
Use of Surrounding Properties: Single Family
streams located on the property, only one of which
Residential; Multi - Family Residential
is an intermittent stream and contains a buffer.
Factors Favorable: See Report
Factors Unfavorable: See Report
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Section 4.2.5 Modification of critical slopes Staff recommends the following based upon the
analysis provided in the report and Attachment C.
• Section A- Staff recommends approval of this area of critical slopes.
• Section B- Staff recommends denial of this area of critical slopes.
• Section C- Staff recommends denial of this area of critical slopes.
2. Section 32.4.2.6 Approval of the Preliminary Site Plan, Staff recommends approval of the site
plan with the Commission's approval of the Critical Slope Modification.
STAFF PERSON: Megan Yaniglos- Senior Planner; Max Greene- Engineering Tech
PLANNING COMMISSION: July 12, 2011
AGENDA TITLE: SDP201100033 Dunlora Forest- Preliminary Site Plan
APPLICANT: Keith Lancaster- Southern Development
PROPERTY OWNER(S): Rock Creek Properties, LLC
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: Request for preliminary approval of 93 units, including townhouses,
single family, and duplexes at a density of 4.16 units per acre [Attachment A]. Associated with this
proposal are requests for a disturbance of critical slopes and bonus density increase for more units per
acre than is allowed with the standard level development required for conventional R4 zoning. The
proposed density is within the limits recommended by the Comprehensive Plan.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Neighborhood Density Residential- residential (3 -6
units /acre); supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, and other small -scale non - residential
uses in Neighborhood 2.
REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
The applicant has requested a modification of critical slopes per Section 4.2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance.
This application has been called up for review by an adjacent owner [Attachment I]. Some of the
concerns include traffic onto Pen Park Lane and Rio Road, erosion and sediment control problems with
the disturbance of the critical slopes, marketability and sale of the units, and the impact to the existing
stream.
The Planning Commission will need to take actions on the following sections of the Zoning
Ordinance:
1. Section 4.2.5 Modification of critical slopes.
2. Section 32.4.2.6 Approval of the Preliminary Site Plan
CRITICAL SLOPES MODIFICATION
STAFF COMMENT:
A number of factors, ordinances, and plans /maps have been analyzed thoroughly in the review of this
modification. This property contains resources that are identified in the Places29 Master Plan, as well as
the Open Space Plan. Planning Division staff has reviewed the development in conjunction with the
Places29 Master Plan and has issued comments [Attachment H].
1. CRITICAL SLOPES MODIFICATION
2
The proposed development will require the disturbance of critical slopes. A modification to allow
critical slopes disturbance is necessary before the site plan can be approved by the Planning
Commission. 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 F],
and staff has analyzed this request to address the provisions of the Ordinance.
The critical slopes in the area of this request appear to be natural. 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." These concerns have been addressed directly through the analysis provided herein,
which is presented in two parts, based on the Section of the Ordinance each pertains to.
Section 4.2.5
Review of the request by Current Development Engineering staff:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The area proposed for disturbance is primarily a portion of an unnamed drainage ravine. There is a
grade difference of approximately 100 feet from top of site to stream buffer. The applicant is proposing
to pipe storm drainage to a stormwater facility and fill in the area to construct an access way and
residential units.
The critical slope disturbances are in the form of soil fill material and retaining walls to construct an
access way and residential units.
Areas
Acres
Total site area
22.3 acres approximately
Area of critical slopes
(man-made & natural)
Man -made = 0
Natural = 6.9 acres
0% of development
31% of development
Total critical slopes area
6.9 acres
31% of development
Total critical slopes disturbed
3.0 acres
50% of critical slopes
The engineering analysis of the request follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The critical slope areas contain natural critical slope areas. Please see the applicant's waiver request
[Attachment F] for details on these areas and the percentages of disturbance.
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 ": Proper slope construction, control
of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of soil.
2. "excessive stormwater run - off": Stormwater runoff from the roads will be conveyed in
pipes to a basin, as the slopes will be reallocated.
3. "siltation of natural and man -made bodies of water ": Inspection and bonding by the
County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper stabilization and maintenance
will ensure long -term stability.
4. "loss of aesthetic resource":
Staff has found mixed findings in regards to this section. Staff has analyzed the critical slopes by
three different sections [Attachment C].
Section A has been identified by staff as being acceptable disturbance. This area is delineated on
the Places29 Master Plan [Attachment D] as critical slopes; however it is not a part of the
Recommended Greenway Buffer. These critical slopes are also not identified in the Open Space
Plan [Attachment E] as a Critical Resource. Also, these slopes are not a part of a larger system of
critical slopes nor are they associated with a stream other aesthetic resource. Therefore, it is
staff's opinion that the disturbance of these critical slopes not result in the loss of an aesthetic
resource.
Section B has mixed findings by staff. This area has been identified in the Places29 Master Plan
as a Recommended Greenway Buffer, as well as Major and Locally Important Stream Valleys
and Adjacent Critical Slopes in the Open Space and Critical Resources Plan. The stream that is
shown on the Places29 Masterplan has been researched and found to be not as large as what is
shown on the County Master Plan by the Army Corps of Engineers [Attachment G]. The
Comprehensive Plan is general in nature and was prepared without detailed analysis of the
stream category. The Commission may interpret a smaller buffer area based on more detailed
studies or may use the larger buffer actually shown in the Comprehensive Plan. However, the
critical slopes that are shown in this area are interspersed and not part of a large system of critical
slopes and are not associated with a stream or other aesthetic resource. Therefore, staff has taken
the conservative approach to Section B and finds that it would be a loss of an aesthetic resource.
However based upon the analysis above, staff would understand a different interpretation and
finding by the Commission on this section not being a loss of an aesthetic resource.
Section C is delineated on the Places29 Master Plan as a Recommended Greenway Buffer, as
well as Major and Locally Important Stream Valleys and Adjacent Critical Slopes in the Open
Space Plan. Staff has found that these slopes are a part of a large system of critical slopes that are
also associated with a stream to the north of the property. Therefore, staff has identified this
section as being a loss of an aesthetic resource and should not be disturbed.
5. "septic effluent ": Public sewer services this neighborhood.
No portion of this site plan is located inside the 100 -year flood plain area according to FEMA Maps,
dated 04 February 2005.
Review of the request by Current Development Planning staff:
Summary of review of modification of Section 4.2:
Section 4.2.5 establishes the review process and criteria for granting a waiver of Section 4.2.3. The
preceding comments by staff address the provisions of Section 4.2.5(a). Staff has included the provisions
of Section 4.2.5(a)(3) here, along with staff comment on the various provisions.
The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding
that:
4
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;
Granting the modification request does not better serve the purpose of this chapter or the public
health, safety or welfare.
B. Alternatives proposed by the developer or subdivider would satisfy the intent and purposes of
section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree;
No alternatives have been proposed by the developer.
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
Staff has found that prohibiting the disturbance of the critical slopes on this property would
restrict the use of the property since this property is zoned for this type of development, and is
located in the development areas. With the exception of the bonus density, this property is zoned
for the development of upwards of four (4) units per acre. The location and amount of the critical
slopes on this property does restrict the property to be developed per its zoning without the
disturbance of some critical slopes.
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 Comprehensive Plan landuse recommendation for the property is for Neighborhood Density
Residential, which promotes three (3) to six (6) units per acre. Since this property is located in
the development areas and is zoned for this development, staff has found that granting the
modification could serve a public purpose of greater import than would be served by strict
application of the regulations. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors has
designated this property as Development Areas in order to keep development out of the Rural
Areas, and this proposal is in line with that goal and direction.
FAVORABLE AND UNFAVORABLE FACTORS:
Staff has found mixed findings in the review of this modification and has identified the following
favorable and unfavorable factors:
Favorable factors:
1. The property is located in the Development Areas which has been identified by the Board of
Supervisors and the Planning Commission as the area where development should occur in the
County.
2. The property is zoned R4- Residential, which permits this type of development.
3. The locations of the critical slopes could be argued to prohibit the use of the property based
upon the allowed number of units that the property is zoned for.
Unfavorable factors:
1. The critical slopes are identified in the Open Space and Critical Resource Plan as Major and
Locally Important Stream Valleys and Adjacent Critical Slopes.
2. Most of the critical slopes as well as other areas on the property have been identified in the
Places29 Master Plan as Recommended Greenway Buffer.
CRITICAL SLOPES MODIFICATION RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the following in reference to Attachment C based upon the analysis, and favorable
and unfavorable factors:
Section A- Staff recommends approval of this area of critical slopes.
Section B- Staff recommends denial of this area of critical slopes.
Section C- Staff recommends denial of this area of critical slopes.
2. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
The preliminary site plan was reviewed by all members of the Site Review Committee and found to
meet the requirements for preliminary approval. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of
the critical slopes modification, Staff recommends approval of the preliminary site plan with the
following conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:
The Current Development Division shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature until
tentative final approvals for the following conditions have been obtained. The final site plan shall not be
signed until the following conditions have been met:
Current Development Planner approval to include:
a.Meet all the requirements in Chapter 18 Section 32 for site plans, including landscaping
and lighting plans.
2. Current Development Engineer approval to include:
a. Additional provisions and easements for drainage across 3 or more lots may be required
for final approval. "Dense development where fencing, decking, etc is expected should
provide yard inlets and pipes rather than ditches. Narrower easements for private yard
drains may be acceptable and will be reviewed for adequacy."
b. The plan must meet all engineering requirements of the Water Protection, Subdivision,
and Zoning Ordinances in addition to all engineering standards detailed in the County's
Design Manual.
3. E911 approval to include:
a. The applicant should contact this office with a list of three (3) road names for "Road A ",
"Road B ", and the 34' access and utility easement for approval before the final plans are
submitted.
4. Albemarle County Service Authority Approval to include:
a.Water easement for future interconnect will be required by ACSA before final site plan
approval.
5. Fire and Rescue Division approval to include:
❑ a. Adequacy of fire flow.
❑ b. Location of Fire Hydrants.
6
6. Virginia Department of Transportation approval
TWO ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN:
1. Section 4.2.5 Modification of critical slopes
2. Section 32.4.2.6 Approval of the Preliminary Site Plan
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Site Plan
B. Location/Detail Maps
C. Critical Slopes Delineation Map
D. Places29 Master Plan Map
E. Open Space Plan Map
F. Applicant Justification
G. Army Corps of Engineers letter
H. Long Range Planning Staff Comments
I. Adjacent Owner Letters