Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201400063 Correspondence Preliminary Plat 2014-11-18 •ow- *we/ Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 9:21 AM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Greg Kamptner; Bill Fritz; David Benish; Steve Driver Subject: RE: Fontana Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Attachments: SUB201400063-Preliminary_Plat_Approval_Letter w conditions 11-14-14.pdf Mr.Nichols, I urge you to consult with Steve Driver on many of your questions,as many of them can be answered by simply looking at the preliminary plat you submitted to the County for review,which was ultimately approved w/ conditions on Nov 14,2014. Many of your other questions are very clearly answered in the approval letter dated Nov 14,2014 which was sent to you via email. For your convenience I have reattached the Nov 14,2014 approval letter to this email. Regardless of the above I offer the following responses below in blue to help clear things up. Hope this helps. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nichols @ymail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 6:42 PM To: Christopher Perez; Greg Kamptner; Bill Fritz; David Benish; Steve Driver Subject: Re: Fontana Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat I appreciate very much your prompt response. Simply put, I want you to confirm the following: 3. Fontana is providing a 50-foot easement to Cascadia. To build the road to access Fontana is not Fontana's responsibility, but Cascadia's. False. Fontana is responsible to build or bond their portion of the road to the property line. This is a condition of the final subdivision plat being approved. 5. Phase 4C has 1 path connecting Lot 3 to Hyland Ridge boundary. There are no other trails in Phase 4C. False. There are three (3) segments of trails depicted on the preliminary plat(see sheet C3.1.0). One of which is between lot 3 and 4, and one of which is between lot 7 and 8, and one of which is adjacent to lot 11. 6. Paragraph 4. of the Proffer states that, "the owner(the occupant of the Lot) shall not request the certificate of occupancy until the final zoning inspection is performed and all required trees are in place". The trees will be in place. If not, then a bond will be required. Previously you said that the bond is required. As a condition of the final plat approval the required trees on each lot shall be bonded prior to the approval of the final plat. The certificate of occupancy shall not be issued until the final zoning inspection is performed and all required trees are in place. 7. The trails easement is 5 feet with contiguous 10 feet to allow space for the equipment maintaining the trails, a total of 15 feet. N!✓ ■r/ False. The Trails are depicted on the preliminary plat as being in open space dedicated fee simple. The area for the trail appears to be 10 foot wide and the trail itself is 5 foot wide (see page C5.2.0 of the prelim plat for typical sections). The final plat shall provide these dimensions on the plat. 8. As far as the "Trails maintenance docs", I refer you to the "Fontana Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Easements dated June 19, 1998 and recorded the same day in Book 1716, pages 0477 through 0521, a comprehensive document of 45 pages. Article - IV, Sec. 1 (b) , second sentence states, "After designation of any parcel of land or any improvements thereon as Common Area by the Declarant(Fontana) or any third party, the Association shall immediately become responsible for all maintenance and operation of said property and for such additional construction of the improvements thereon as may be authorized by the Association's Board of Directors. The existing Fontana Declaration of Covenants and restrictions doc may cover the maintenance of the trails in Fontana 4C, but this document shall be submitted with the final plat and will be reviewed at that time to assure it covers their maintenance. Typically these types of declarations are amended to cover new portions of large projects and are recorded with the final plats of the new section. I appreciate your prompt confirmation. Thank you. From: Christopher Perez <cperez(ca�.albemarle.orq> To: 'Anthony Nichols' <anthony.nichols(a�ymail.com> Cc: Greg Kamptner<GKamptne(a�albemarle.orq>; Bill Fritz <BFRITZ(a.albemarle.org>; David Benish <DBENISH a( .albemarle.orq>; Steve Driver<sdriver @terraenaineering.net> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 6:53 AM Subject: RE: Fontana Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Mr. Nichols, I received your email dated 11-16-14 but am unclear as to what action you wish to take by sending it. Do you wish to appeal the conditions of approval to the Planning Commission (PC) or are you merely going on record as not agreeing with the conditions but are willing to follow them? Section 14-223 of the ordinance provides you the ability to appeal the agent's decision to the PC and then the Board of Supervisors (BOS) if you so choose. You have ten days from the date of the approval letter to do so. Section 14-223(A) states: "Appeal to commission and board of supervisors. If a preliminary plat is disapproved by the agent, or is approved with conditions that the subdivider objects to, the subdivider at its sole option may appeal the decision of the agent to the commission and, if the commission disapproves the preliminary plat or affirms the objectionable conditions, to the board of supervisors. The appeal shall be in writing and be filed with the agent within ten (10) days after the date of the decision by the agent or by the commission, as the case may be. The action by the commission and the board shall comply with subsections 14-222(C), (D) and (E), as applicable." If you choose to appeal, please be clear as to what you wish to appeal. Notably, the email you sent with the numbering #3, #6, and #8 appear to correspond to the conditions of approval of the same number; however, #7 of your email does not correspond to the 7th condition of approval. Rather it appears it may apply to condition #9 of the approval letter. If you choose to appeal, please be clear as to what conditions of approval you are appealing and on what grounds. Thanks 2 Christopher P. Perez' Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road ' Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 From: Anthony Nichols[mailto:anthony.nicholsaymail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2014 11:23 AM To: Christopher Perez Subject: Fontana Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat 3. I need to remind you that Fontana - in order to be able to proceed and conclude the completion of its subdivision was - unwillingly- required to provide an "easement"for the Cascadia use. A Webster's definition of"an easement"describes, "1. Law, a right held by one property owner to make use of the land of another for a limited purpose, a right of passage". As the Proffer clearly states"an easement", you are asked to remove the two ending phrases of the last sentence beginning with "The Cascadia Connector...". 6. The 5 trees required to be planted on each lot shall be bonded at a time when a construction permit of the homes is issued. The Proffer provides that, "the owner shall not request a certificate of occupancy until....all required trees are in place". Is that not clear? 7. The open space, including the mountainous trails in all the phases prior to this present one have been conveyed to the Fontana Owners Association, Inc. in a grant deed recorded on December 13, 2013. Fontana is no longer required to provide that detail. It has lived with it for far too long. Go to the recorded document for evidence. 8. In your reference to "evidencing maintenance of the open space", I must caution you on the use of a need to submit for County review and approval. You may not be aware that the Association has not maintained the trails from 2006 to the present time, thus requiring Fontana to repair the damage caused by a runoff in a mountainous terrain, not once, but 3 different times, at an unreimbursed cost of$145,000.The constitutionality of the requirement is questionable as the homeowners did not ask for the trails in the first place. You may also not be aware that less than 20 % of them ever use the trails. That percentage does not include the trespassers, as the trails were deeded to the Association for its exclusive use. As the annual maintenance cost of keeping 19,000 linear feet of 5-foot wide trails is estimated to be $60,000 and the annual Association's budget is approximately$120,000, whereas any new maintenance cost in excess of 10 % must be approved by a 2/3's majority, it is improper for the 80 % of the population to pay the cost of maintenance where only less than 20 % of the homeowners- aside from those trespassing - is using these trails. Why only Fontana ? You are approaching culpable dimensions as you continue adding issues that no longer belong. 3 Nee /O=ALBEMARLE/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIE From: Christopher Perez Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 9:53 AM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Greg Kamptner; Bill Fritz; David Benish; 'Steve Driver' Subject: RE: Fontana Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Mr.Nichols, I received your email dated 11-16-14 but am unclear as to what action you wish to take by sending it. Do you wish to appeal the conditions of approval to the Planning Commission(PC) or are you merely going on record as not agreeing with the conditions but are willing to follow them? Section 14-223 of the ordinance provides you the ability to appeal the agent's decision to the PC and then the Board of Supervisors (BOS) if you so choose. You have ten days from the date of the approval letter to do so. Section 14-223(A) states: "Appeal to commission and board of supervisors. If a preliminary plat is disapproved by the agent, or is approved with conditions that the subdivider objects to, the subdivider at its sole option may appeal the decision of the agent to the commission and, if the commission disapproves the preliminary plat or affirms the objectionable conditions, to the board of supervisors. The appeal shall be in writing and be filed with the agent within ten (10) days after the date of the decision by the agent or by the commission, as the case may be. The action by the commission and the board shall comply with subsections 14-222(C), (D) and(E), as applicable. " If you choose to appeal, please be clear as to what you wish to appeal. Notably,the email you sent with the numbering#3, #6, and#8 appear to correspond to the conditions of approval of the same number; however, #7 of your email does not correspond to the 7th condition of approval. Rather it appears it may apply to condition #9 of the approval letter. If you choose to appeal, please be clear as to what conditions of approval you are appealing and on what grounds. Thanks Christopher P. Perez;Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 Mclntire Road 1 Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nicholsC@ymail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2014 11:23 AM To: Christopher Perez Subject: Fontana Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat 3. I need to remind you that Fontana - in order to be able to proceed and conclude the completion of its subdivision was- unwillingly- required to provide an "easement"for the Cascadia use. A Webster's definition of"an easement" describes, "1. Law, a right held by one property owner to make use of the land of another for a limited purpose, a right of passage". As the Proffer clearly states "an easement", you are asked to remove the two ending phrases of the last sentence beginning with "The Cascadia Connector...". 6. The 5 trees required to be planted on each lot shall be bonded at a time when a construction permit of the homes is issued. The Proffer provides that, "the owner shall not request a certificate of occupancy until....all required trees are in place". Is that not clear? 1 7t The open space, including the mountainous trails in all the phases prior to this present one have been conveyed to the Fontana Owners Association, Inc. in a grant deed recorded on December 13, 2013. Fontana is no longer required to provide that detail. It has lived with it for far too long. Go to the recorded document for evidence. 8. In your reference to "evidencing maintenance of the open space", I must caution you on the use of a need to submit for County review and approval. You may not be aware that the Association has not maintained the trails from 2006 to the present time, thus requiring Fontana to repair the damage caused by a runoff in a mountainous terrain, not once, but 3 different times, at an unreimbursed cost of$145,000.The constitutionality of the requirement is questionable as the homeowners did not ask for the trails in the first place. You may also not be aware that less than 20 % of them ever use the trails. That percentage does not include the trespassers, as the trails were deeded to the Association for its exclusive use. As the annual maintenance cost of keeping 19,000 linear feet of 5-foot wide trails is estimated to be $60,000 and the annual Association's budget is approximately $120,000, whereas any new maintenance cost in excess of 10 % must be approved by a 2/3's majority, it is improper for the 80 % of the population to pay the cost of maintenance where only less than 20 % of the homeowners- aside from those trespassing- is using these trails. Why only Fontana ? You are approaching culpable dimensions as you continue adding issues that no longer belong. 2 /O=ALBEMARLE/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIE From: Christopher Perez Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 3:34 PM To: 'Steve Driver'; 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Glenn Brooks; John Anderson; Greg Kamptner; Mark Graham; Bill Fritz; David Benish Subject: SUB201400063- Fontana 4C - preliminary sub plat. Attachments: SUB201400063-Preliminary_Plat_Approval_Letter w conditions 11-14-14.pdf Steve/Tony, Attached is the approval letter w/conditions for the preliminary sub plat for SUB201400063 -Fontana 4C - preliminary sub plat. Christopher P.Perri l Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 1 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 11:27 AM To: 'Steve Driver' Cc: John Anderson; Shawn Maddox; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C-Fire and Rescue Steve, I've looked over the rezoning file and make note that during the planning of Fontana 4C, street trees were expected and relied upon as an integral part of meeting the neighborhood model. Street tress help provide neighborhood friendly streets. Staff would prefer you provide street trees or some variation in the amount of street trees but I also make note that neither the subdivision ordinance, nor the final approved rezoning application plan, nor the proffers require street trees in the development. Thus if you would like to omit them or reduce their numbers that is permitted. Hope that helps. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver©terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:52 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: John Anderson; Shawn Maddox; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C-Fire and Rescue Chris, Yes—that helps. Thank you. We were also going to check on the street(see above)/ lot tree question. The minimum amount of trees on the lots is required per the proffer 4. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 1 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperezOalbemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 4:46 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: John Anderson; Shawn Maddox; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C-Fire and Rescue Steve, I have not heard anything further from Fire and Rescue. I sent them two emails requesting guidance on the new note which explains the parking on one side of the road. As discussed via phone, 29' FCFC minus a single on-street parking space at 9' wide, leaves 20' clearance, which is what fire and rescue requires, so you should be good on that front. But if you are asking about 29' FCFC minus two (2) on-street parking spaces at a combined 18 feet width then you are below the required 20' clear zone and they most surely will have a problem with approving that. Hope that helps. Christopher P. Perez i Senior Planner Department of Community Development lCounty of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road(Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver@terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 4:30 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: Fontana 4C-Fire and Rescue Chris, Any word? We are close to re-submitting and need an answer in case we need to tweek or remove a note from the plan. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 2 *el FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 3 Christopher Perez From: Steve Driver[sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 8:10 AM To: John Anderson Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; amiller @terraengineering.net; Glenn Brooks; Bill Fritz; Amelia McCulley; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: Fontana 4C John, We have completed the water and sewer data sheets,and storm drain and sewer and water profiles for Sections 1 and 2.The E+SC for sections 1 and 2 are in progress and will be completed this week. I reviewed your email briefly this morning. Also,we are working to complete the remaining Preliminary Plat items identified below. Thank you. This is very helpful. I'll be at MCV today with my wife for her annual checkup (she was a liver donor in 2002), but back in office tomorrow. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: John Anderson [mailto:janderson2 @albemarle.org] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 6:10 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; amiller @terraengineering.net; Glenn Brooks; Bill Fritz; Amelia McCulley; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: Fontana 4C Steve, 14-Oct,we spoke after the VSMP informational meeting at county offices. I am not Planning coordinator for this project;many play a role,but insofar as the Final Grading Plan(ZMA#04- 18, Condition#2,Feb-24,2008)requires County Engineer review and approval, please accept: 1. This note relates to Proffer Final Grading Plan,to what is required for approval. This note relies on: • Terra Engineering notes/attachments • Proffer condition#2 • Recent preliminary plats(4-Jun 14; 20-Aug 14, 1-Oct 14) 1 Christopher Perez From: Bill Fritz Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 3:13 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: Fontana 4C,VSMP vs. Mass Grading Keeping you in the email loop. William D. Fritz,AICP Chief of Special Projects 434-296-5823 ext. 3242 From: John Anderson Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 12:20 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Glenn Brooks; Bill Fritz Subject: Fontana 4C, VSMP vs. Mass Grading Steve, I hope this helps- Grading permit issuance requirements were fundamentally altered 7/1/14 when certain aspects of the VSMP application review and approval process devolved from VDEQ to localities across the state—to ACCD in Albemarle County. The effect of change on grading permit issuance(clearing/grading/land disturbance)is reflected in section §17-417.B. • §17-417—pre-requisites to land disturbing activity • §17-501—VSMP permit application; applicable technical criteria (Part II-B [new]; vs. Part II-C [old]) • 9VAC-25-870-48—Grandfathering • 9VAC25-870-10—Layout, definition • §18-8.5.5.4—Building permits and grading permits Tony Nichols visited less than an hour ago to inquire about cutting trees on Fontana Phase 4C parcels. I will forward email that addresses his question. If the answer is unchanged, I feel the question has been thoughtfully considered. I plan to begin reviewing Fontana 4C preliminary plat received 2-Oct, on Friday. Thank you for speaking with me this morning. Take care- John E.Anderson,PE I Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 1 -woe 434.296.5832 ext.3069 §17-417 (http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms_Center/Departments/County Attorney/Forms/Albemarle_Cou my Code_Ch17_Water Protection.pdf) 2 Sec. 17-417 Prerequisites to had dbturbiag activity. Upon the approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for any land disturbing activity subject solely to the VESCP, or a VSMP permit, no land disturbing activity shown on the approved erosion and sediment control plan or stormwater management plan shall occur until all of the following are satisfied: A. Land disturbing activity subject only to the VESCP. If the land disturbing activity is subject solely to the VESCP,no land disturbing activity shall occur and no County department or office or any other public entity authorized under any other Ism to issue grading,building, or other permits for activities involving Land disturbing activities regulated under this chapter shall issue any such permit unless: (1) the owner submits with his application the approved erosion and sediment 17-46 Ste.#31,7-14 ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE control plan and certification that the plan will be followed;(ii)the person responsible for carrying out the plan provides to the administrator the name of the person holding a certificate of competence who will be in charge of and responsible for carrying out the land disturbing activity; and(iii)an agreement with surety is provided as required by section 17-414. B. Land disturbing activity subject to the MAO If the land disturbing activity requires a VSMP permit, no land disturbing activity shall occur and no County department or office or any other public entity authorized under any other law to issue grading, building, or other permits for activities involving land disturbing activities regulated under this chapter shall issue any such permit unless:(1)the owner submits with his application the approved VSMP permit,including the approved erosion and sediment control plan and the approved stormwater management plan, evidence of general permit coverage to discharge stormwater, if such evidence is required under sections 17-401(C) and l7.405(AX 1), and certification that the plans will be followed; (ii) the person responsible for carrying out the plan provides to the administrator the name of the person holding a certificate of competence who will be in charge of and responsible for carrying out the land disturbing activity;and(iii)an agreement with surety is provided as required by section 17- 414;provided that land disturbing activity may occur prior to approval of stormwater management plan if the activity was previously covered under the general permit issued July 1,2009. C. Revocation of appnswil. The administrator is authorized to revoke the approval of the plan if the person responsible fails to provide the name of a person holding a certificate of competence prior to engaging in the land disturbing activity and the person responsible for carrying out the plan shall be subject to the penalties provided by State law. (§ 17-207:§7-5,6.18-75,§7,2-11-76,421-76,6.2-76,7-9.80,74-81,2-11-87,3-18-92;§ 19.3-15,2-11- 98;Code 1988,§§7-5, 193-15;§ 17-207,Ord.98-A(1),8-5-98;Ord.09-17(1),8-5.09,effective 9-5.09)(§ 17-306: § 19.1-7,9-29-77,art. 11, § 2,7-11-90; § 19.3-30, 2-1198; Code 1988, §§ 19.1-7, 19.3-30; § 17- 306,Ord.98-A(1),8-5-98;Ord.09-17(1),8-5-09,effective 9-5-09;Ord. 14-17(1),5-7-14,effective 7-1-14) State Woe refereace-Va.Code CI 62.1-44.15:27,62.1-4435:34,62.1-44.15:55;9VAC'25-1170-34,9V'AC25-1190-40. §17-501 3 Sec.17-581 VSMP permit anilicatiam;applieabk tedaieal criteria. Each VSMP permit application shall satisfy the criteria,techniques and methods provided as follows: A. Land disturbing activity that obtained general permit cov rage or commenced land disturbing activity prior to July 1, 2014. Any land disturbing activity that obtained general permit coverage or commenced land disturbing activity prior to July 1,2014 shall be conducted in accordance with the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99. These projects shall remain subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25.870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99 for an additional two general permit cycles. After that time, the portions of the project not under construction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the State Water Control Board. B. Land disturbing activity that obtains initial general permit coverage on or after July 1, 2014. Any land disturbing activity that obtains initial general permit coverage on or after July I,2014 shall be conducted in accordance with the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-62 through 9VAC25-870-92, except as provided in subsection(C).These projects shall remain subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-1170-62 through 9VAC25-870-92 for an additional two general permit cycles.After that time,the portions of the project not under construction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the State Water Control Board. C. Land disturbing activity related to certain development approvals prior to July I. 2012.Any land disturbing activity shall be subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25.870-93 through 9VAC25- 870-99,provided all of the following apply. 1. Prior qualifying approval:A proffered or conditional zoning plan,zoning with a plan of development, preliminary or final subdivision plat,preliminary or final site plan,or any document determined by the County to be equivalent thereto (1) was approved by the County prior to July 1,2012;(u)provided a layout,(iii)the technical criteria in 9VAC25- 870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99; and (iv) has not been subsequently modified or amended in a manner resulting in an increase in the amount of phosphorus leaving each point of discharge,and such that there is no increase in the volume or rate of runoff: 2. General permit not issued.A general permit has not been issued prior to July 1,2014. 17-52 Supp.#31.7-14 ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE 3. Land disturbing activity not commenced. Land disturbing activity did not commence prior to July 1,2014. 4. Duration.These projects shall remain subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99 for one additional general permit cycle. After that time, the portions of the project not under construction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the State Water Control Board. 9VAC-25-870-48—Grandfathering(http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?000+reg+9VAC25-870-48 ) 4 9VAC25-870-48. Grandtathering. A. Any land-disturbing activity shall be considered grandfathered by the VSMP authority and II C (9vAC25-87o-93 et seq.) technical criteria of this chapter provided: 1. A proffered or conditional zoning plan, zoning with a plan of development, preliminar preliminary or final site plan, or any document determined by the locality to be equivalent t the locality prior to July 1, 2012, (ii) provided a layout as defined in 9VAC25-870-1o, (iii) wil technical criteria of this chapter, and (iv) has not been subsequently modified or amended increase in the amount of phosphorus leaving each point of discharge, and such that t volume or rate of runoff; 2.A state permit has not been issued prior to July 1, 2014; and 3. Land disturbance did not commence prior to July 1, 2014. B. Locality, state, and federal projects shall be considered grandfathered by the VSMP autho the Part II C technical criteria of this chapter provided: 1. There has been an obligation of locality, state, or federal funding, in whole or in part, f department has approved a stormwater management plan prior to July 1, 2012; 2. A state permit has not been issued prior to July 1, 2014; and 3. Land disturbance did not commence prior to July 1, 2014. C. Land disturbing activities grandfathered under subsections A and B of this section shall rerr technical criteria of this chapter for one additional state permit cycle. After such time, portion: construction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the board. D. In cases where governmental bonding or public debt financing has been issued for a pre such project shall be subject to the technical criteria of Part II C. E. Nothing in this section shall preclude an operator from constructing to a more stringent stan Statutory Authority §§ 62.1-44.15:25 and 62.1-44.15:28 of the Code of Virginia. 9VAC25-870-10—Layout, definitions(http://Iis.virginia.Rov/cei-bin/Iegp604.exe?000+reg+9VAC25-870-10) 5 Part I Definitions, Purpose, and Applicability 9VAC25-870-10. Definitions. The following words and terms used in this chapter have the following meanings unless otherwise. "Ad" means the Virginia Stormwater Management Act, Article 2.3 (§ 62.1-44.15:24 et seq.) the Code of Virginia. "Administrator" means the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protects representative. "Agreement in lieu of a stormwater management plan" means a contract between the VSP permittee that specifies methods that shall be implemented to comply with the requirements e of a single-family residence; such contract may be executed by the VSMP authority in lieu plan. "Applicable standards and limitations" means all state, interstate, and federal standarc discharge or a related activity is subject under the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1251 effluent limitations, water quality standards, standards of performance, toxic effluent sty management practices, and standards for sewage sludge use or disposal under §§ 301, 302, and 405 of CWA. "Layout" means a conceptual drawing sufficient to provide for the specified stormwater mat the time of approval. §18-8.5.5.4—Building permits and grading permits 6 S.S.SA BUILDING PERMITS AND GRADING PERMITS Building permits and grading permits may be issued as provided herein: a. A budding permit, including any special footings or foundation permits, may be issued for any work within a planned development, excluding the installation of street signs, only after the approval of the final site plan or final subdivision plat in the area in which the permit would apply. b. A grading permit may be issued for site preparation grading associated with an approved planned development if the erosion and sediment control plan measures, disturbed area and grading are in conformity with the concept grading and measures shown on the application plan as determined by the county engineer,after consultation with the director of planning. c. If, after consultation with the director of planning, the county engineer finds that there is not enough detail on the application plan to assure that the proposed grading and other measures are consistent with the application plan,a grading permit shall not be issued until the final site plan is approved,or the final subdivision plat is tentatively approved. d. Within each neighborhood model district, the department of community development shall review each building permit application or modification to determine whether the proposed structure conforms with the architectural and landscape standards in the approved code of development (§8.5.6.4, 12-10-80;9-9-92;*8.53.4,Ord.03-18(2),3-19-03;Ord.09-18(9), 10-14-09) 7 Christopher Perez From: John Anderson Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 12:31 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks; Christopher Perez Subject: RE: Tree-Cutting-Fontana Phase 4C Steve, Tony Nichols visited to speak with me this morning—he asked about cutting trees on Fontana Phase 4C parcels. I feel that the email below addresses his question, and notice it was sent to Mr. Nichols. I do not mean to impose obstacles, and try to approve plans whenever possible. I welcome calls. Please ref. email below for specific, detailed requirements re. tree cutting. It appears that appropriate county staff are aware and engaged, including the County Attorney's office. Thank you for speaking with me on the phone this morning. Regards, John E,Anderson,PE Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development (County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3069 From: Bill Fritz Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 11:55 AM To: John Anderson Subject: FW: Tree-Cutting Chris sent this email on Friday. It answers all the tree cutting questions. Feel free to forward this email and the included attachment to Mr. Nichols. William D. Fritz,AICP Chief of Special Projects 434-296-5823 ext. 3242 From: Christopher Perez Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 11:16 AM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Subject:Tree-Cutting Tony, Greg Kamptner forwarded me the following email in which you are seeking his assistance in approval to cut trees on the Fontana 4C property. I ask that you please discontinue contacting the County Attorney's office for such items related to this project, as that office has no role in review/approval of plats. Rather they merely i Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 11:16 AM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: Tree-Cutting Attachments: July 3, 2014 Tree Cutting discussion.pdf Tony, Greg Kamptner forwarded me the following email in which you are seeking his assistance in approval to cut trees on the Fontana 4C property. I ask that you please discontinue contacting the County Attorney's office for such items related to this project, as that office has no role in review/approval of plats. Rather they merely provide guidance to staff when prompted on such items. The Community Development Department would be your primary point of contact for items related to the plat. For any future questions related to development of the property please contact, myself or Glenn Brooks/John Anderson. In response to your email request to cut trees on the property, please see the attached July 3, 2014 email to you that provided answers to this question. Below I have provided the primary excerpt from that email which applies to this request. If you have any questions about these comments or believe we are not correctly applying the ordinance please contact me. Tree cutting cannot occur until all of the following events occur: 1. Preliminary Plat Approval 2. Approval of Road Plans. 3. Approval of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans. 4. Posting of necessary bonds. 5. Issuance of Grading Permit Once all these events occur you will be able to cut trees but only within the area shown for road construction. You may not cut all the trees on the property until you have the final plat approved. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Greg Kamptner Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 8:32 AM Subject: FW: Tree-Cutting FYI Greg Kamptner Deputy County Attorney County of Albemarle gkamptner( albemarle.org From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nicholsCa�ymail.com] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 7:31 AM To: Greg Kamptner Subject: Tree-Cutting Greg, 1 As the tree-cutting is not considered disturbing the soil, it would be very much appreciated if you would order that work to commence. When that work was started in May, 2013 there was no soil disturbed as the trucks hauling away the cut trees simply drove on the ground and left no marks on it. The reason for this request is simply to speed-up the process before the grading commences. As time is of the essence, this would be very much appreciated. 2 Christopher Perez From: Steve Driver[sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 1:43 PM To: John Anderson • Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C John, See responses below in red. The revised plans you'll get today will not show any revisions to the Section 3 stormwater basin as we haven't had sufficient time to work through that yet, but let's continue our efforts to get this completed as quickly as possible. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: John Anderson [mailto:janderson2@ albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 11:45 AM To: Steve Driver Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C Steve, I plan to visit tomorrow. Okay.The situation you described 9/25 (riprap ditch/Fontana Drive) may help clear question of adequate receiving channel for discharge from proposed SWM basin. Okay. Have you located SWM design details/calculations, any email with Phil Custer? I will look for them and send to you. Level of design detail and prior consideration given this basin, as with information concerning Hyland Ridge Subdivision riprap ditch, may help. Okay, I believe we sent Phil routing computations, a BMP worksheet and adequate channel calcs at his request. An unanswered question 9/25 was whether a retaining wall above the proposed basin (0.85 open space, near Int. Fontana/Brunello) would meet or alleviate slope requirements at this location. §18-30.7.5.(c) indicates it will not. A reverse bench or surface water diversion (§18-30.7.5.(d)) are options if vertical interval of 2:1 slopes exceeds 20'. Runoff might pass over a wall unimpeded, but a wall may offer flatter slopes. §18-30.7.5.2.(c)(1) -vertical interval for 3:1 slopes is 30'. See sketch just emailed to you. I appreciate your patience, realize it's important. Thank you- John E.Anderson,PE I Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3069 1 Christopher Perez From: Steve Driver[sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 9:38 AM To: John Anderson Cc: Christopher Perez; 'Anthony Nichols'; Glenn Brooks Subject: Fontana 4C John, Have you been able to get out to the site to look at the rip rap ditch along Fontana Drive? Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434)244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 i i 4 qiugre TERRA ENGINEERING AND 2374 STUARTS DRAFT HIGHWAY,STUARTS DRAFT.VA 24477 1 )re , LAND SOLUTIONS,PC PH.(540)337-4591 FAX (540)337-5291 October 1,2014 Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Rd,North Wing Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SUB201400063 Fontana—Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Chris: As you know,the applicant is seeking Preliminary Plat approval at the earliest possible date. For clarity,we've provided the September 16,2014 comments and responses in red italicized print. Engineering comments: 1) [14-203(1), 14-218] The public notification fee of$200 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Comments have been held till the SRC meeting.Please pay the fee prior to any further review of the plat. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 2)) [ZMA2004-18,Proffer2, 14-302(A4)and (A5), 14-305, 14-311] It was determined by the Zoning Administrator that the final grading plan noted in proffer 2 is permitted to be a part of the preliminary plat in order to work towards compliance with proffer 2. It shall be up to the Review Engineer(John Anderson& ` F Glenn Brooks)to determine if the final grading plan submitted meets the criteria to satisfy proffer 2. Please contact Engineering for this item Rev 2. Comment not adequately addressed,Engineeering has not approved the final grading plan and requires additional changes to the plan.Additional revisions have been made to the plan. 3) [14-410(H)& (I), 14-422(E)& (F)] Standards for all streets and alleys. In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. Sidewalks and planting strips shall be designed and constructed in compliance with Section 14-422. Curb and gutters, sidewalks, and landscape strips are required for Belluno Lane. Rev 2. Comment addressed. 4) [ZMA2004-18,ZMA2011-1,Proffer 10, 14-302(A)14] The location, acreage, and current owner of all the land intended to be dedicated for public use, or to be reserved in a deed for the common use of lot owners in the subdivision shall be shown on the preliminary plat. The rezoning's application plan for ZMA2004-018 shows pedestrian trails in Phase 4C Section 2 connecting from existing trails in Fontana and to surrounding neighborhoods. Specifically from VIA FLORENCE ROAD along the left side of BELLUNO LANE, connecting to HIGHLAND RIDGE and another portion of the trail from the cul-de-sac between Lots 3 and 4 to ASHCROFT. Revisions to proffer#10 from ZMA2011-1 do not negate the requirement for these trails to be provided. In order to comply with this requirement,the trails need to be depicted on the preliminary plat and final plat.Also,assure they are each within a l Oft wide easement.Also,on the plat provide ownership information for the proposed easements. Rev 2. Comment adressed. Trails have been depicted on th eplat per email correspondence/guidance with the Zoning Administrator. 5) [ZMA2004-18,ZMA2011-1,Profferl0, 14-302(A)14] The location, acreage, and current owner of all land intended to be dedicated for public use, or to be reserved in a deed for the common use of lot owners in the subdivision shall be shown on the preliminary plat. How are Brunello Court residents in Phase 4C Section 3 PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez ..r .... October 1,2014 Page 2 of 12 able to gain access from their sidewalks to the trails throughout Fontana without entering the public road? Also,how are Lots 12-18 in Phase 4C Section 1 to gain access from their lots to the trails throughout Fontana without entering the public road? A possible solution is to continue the existing trails from the rear of Lot 109 in Phase 4B along the rear lot line of Lots 18-14,along the side lot line of Lot 13 to the rear of Lot 12,down to the existing path on Lots 106-104 in Phase 4B. Please discuss your proposed solution with Engineering and Planning and revise appropriately. Rev 2. Comment addressed. Trials have been depicted on the plat per email correspondence/guidance with the Zoning Administrator. 6) 114-302(A)51 Public Easements. Existing easements shall be labeled with the deed book and page number and the name of the public owner of record. The plat depicts existing path easements and provides deed book and page reference information but neglects to provide the name of the public owner of record. Revise to provide ownership information for the existing easements. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 7) [14-302(A)14] Is the open space depicted on the plat to be dedicated/owned fee simply by the HOA?If so, provide this information on the plat.If not,whom is it to be dedicated to?Rev 1. Comment addressed. 8) [ A2004-18] The residue of Phase 4C Section 3, depicted on the preliminary plat as "A-0.75 acres"shall be added to Lot 118 on the final plat for Phase 4C,OR on another plat to be recorded in the Clerk's Office prior to approval of the final subdivision plat, at which point Deed Book Page Reference Number of said plat shall be provided on the final plat for Phase 4C. Revise appropriately. Rev 2. Comment acknowledged by the applicant on prelim plat,sheet C2,in a note. This item shall be a condition of the final subdivision plat approval. 9) IZMA2004-18,14-4091 The Cascadia Connector(pedestrian and emergency access) located in Phase 4C Section 3 shall connect to Fontana Drive and be built to the property line. Revise the preliminary plat to depict this connector road,to include road width. Design of this road shall be part of the road plan for Phase 4C.Also,on the final plat there shall be a note for this road which states: "Reserved for dedication on demand by the County for a public road connection between Fontana and Cascadia. This access way shall not be used for construction traffic." Rev2. The Cascadia connector has been depicted on the preliminary plat as a 40 foot R/W; however, the R/W shall be a minimum of 50 foot wide to meet VDOT requirements for the public road design.As such,the road plan shall dictate the specific design of the public road. The design of the road is needed for an overall grading plan to be approved by Engineering,as grading is going to take place with the construction of this road. The Cascadia Connector(pedestrian and emergency access) located in Phase 4C Section 3 shall connect to Fontana Drive and be built to the property line or bonded prior to final subdivision plat approval. This item shall be a condition of final subdivision plat approval. In the applicant's response letter they state that the road shall be built and designed by Cascadia. The County does not dictate who builds the road,as long as it's built or bonded.Please note that only the property owner can bind the approved road. The final plat for Fontana cannot be approved till it's built or bonded (If)the applicant would like to seek an exception or variation to the requirement of 14-409,such a request shall be provided by the applicant,the appropriate fee shall be paid, and the item shall be sent to / the Planning Commission for review/approval. The right-of-way was widened to 50 feet and the road grading provided on Sheets 3.0 and 4.0. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING WW W.TERRAENG INEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez '`r► .... October 1,2014 Page 3 of 12 10) [30.7.5] Preserved Slopes. Please discontinue the use of the term"Critical slopes"throughout the plan, as the slopes onsite are now defined as"Preserved slopes"and"Managed slopes"as defined by the March 5,2014 BOS changes to the critical slopes portion of the ordinance(Section 30.7.4 and 30.7.5 adopted on 3-5-14). On the plat,revise sheet C2.0.0 to correctly label these slopes distinguishing those which are Preserved and those which are Managed,utilizing the current ordinance. Also, on sheet C1.0.0 remove the verbiage: "Critical Slope Waiver Approved". Rev 2. Comment addressed. While it has been determined that the disturbance of the Preserved Slopes onsite are permitted,the critical slopes waiver previously approved is not the trigger for this,as that waiver was associated with SUB2008- 287,a plat which was ultimately denied,thus rendering the waiver no longer valid. Rather the legislative action of the rezoning is driving the applicant's ability to disturb the preserved slopes onsite pursuant to Section 30.7.4(b)(1)(g). Please note that the proposed disturbance shall meet the design standards of Section 30.7.5,Engineering will determine if the proposal satisfies these requirements. Their approval of this item shall be required prior to final plat approval. Disturbance to the Managed slopes onsite are permitted by right provided that design standards listed in 30.7.5 are satisfied to mitigate the impacts caused by the disturbance of the slopes. Engineering staff shall determine if the proposed improvements meet these design standards. Their approval of this item shall be required prior to final plat approval. 4 Rev 2. Comment partially addressed.Please work with Engineering to assure the slopes are being disturbed as provided for in the design standards. 11) [14-302(B)(1), 14-302(B)5] On sheet Cl, under project data, Gross Residential Density is incorrectly listed as .50 units/acre. Gross Residential Density is a product of the total number of dwelling units in a development divided by the gross residential area.The true density is for the proposal is 1.98 units/acre. Please revise. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 12) [14-302A(3)] Existing or Platted Streets. On the plat provide"Public"or"Private"designation for the existing and proposed roads in the development. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 13) [14-302(B)6] Zoning Classification. The cover sheet, under Project Data, under Existing Zoning,a note regarding the zoning ZMA2011-1 shall be added to the existing information. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 14) [14-302(B)6] Tax Map Parcel Number. On the cover sheet, under Project Data,there is a typographical error of the Tax Map Parcel for the property. It currently reads"Tax Map 78 Parcel A";however, it should read "Tax Map 78E Parcel A". Revise appropriately. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 15) [14-302(B)(1)] General Information. On the cover sheet,under Project Data: Property Size,the acreage of the property is listed as 17.5 acres;however,County Property Records indicate the parcel is 11.7 acres(16.37 as of Jan 1).Please address the inconsistency. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 16) [14-302(A)(9)] Building site on proposed lots. The preliminary plat shall contain the following note: "Each lot contains a building site that complies with Section 4.2.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance." Revise as applicable. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 17) [14-302(B)(1)] General Information. When the plat is revised,please provide the date of the last revision on the plat. Rev 1. Comment addressed. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENG INEERING.NET Christopher P.Perez ' ..re October 1,2014 Page 4 of 12 18) [ZMA2004-18] A note shall be added to the final plat per proffer#9: "The colors for the facade treatments and the colors and materials for the roofs shall be subject to prior approval by the Director of Planning." Rev 1. Comment addressed. 19) A2004-18] A note shall be added to the final plat per proffer#5 and the new trials within phase 4C "The Owner shall not request that the County issue the ninth (9`h) building permit until the paths have been completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer."Rev 1. Comment acknowledged by the applicant. The note shall be provided on the final plat. 20) [ZMA2004-18,Proffer 4] Landscaping. The applicant has chosen to fulfill proffer 4 through the installation of new plantings. Thus the required new trees shall be bonded prior to signature/final approval of the final plat. Rev 1. Comment acknowledged by the applicant. This item shall be a condition of final subdivision plat approval. 21) [14-435] Road plans shall be provided and approved prior to final subdivision plat approval.Also, roads must be built or bonded prior to the signing of the final plat. Revl. Comment acknowledged by the applicant. 22) [14-317] Instrument evidencing maintenance of certain improvements. Prior to Final Plat approval, an instrument evidencing maintenance of the Open Space,Required Plantings associated with proffer 4 (an exhibit shall be provided in the HOA docs which depicts the 5 trees per lot that are required),and Trail Easements will need to be submitted for County review and approval. The County Attorney will be required to review/approve the maintenance documents prior to final plat approval. Submit the draft documents to Planning staff for cursory review and then we'll forward them to the County Attorney for review/approval. Rev 1. Comment acknowledged by the applicant.This item shall be a condition of final subdivision plat approval. New Comment Rev 2: 23) [ZMA2004-18,ZMA2011-1,Proffer 10, 14-302(A)14] The location, acreage, and current owner of all the land intended to be dedicated for public use, or to be reserved in a deed for the common use of lot owners in the subdivision shall be shown on the preliminary plat. The trails have been depicted on the preliminary subdivision plat; however,they are not eled,nor listed as�aetng in open space(fee simple),nor are they- labeled as being in easements. On the final subdivision plat,the required trails shall be la ,dimensioned and specified to be in easements or open space(fee simple). This item shall be a condition of ma subdivision plat approval. rail labels added to sheet 4.1 specifying they are in open space. 1 ?, E ineering Comments Continued: • major comment immediately follows. It is new to the extent it addresses design, safety,and Open Space in more detail then prior comments on grading,steep slopes overlay district, SWM requirements,and WPO application. Please see prior comments#10, 13, 14, 17.c,and 18,p.2.Prior comments spotlight need for design protections that meet county or state requirements. We are in the process of working through these comments. Grading and design associated with proposed extended detention SWM basin design(at this location)is problematic: PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P.Perez October 1,2014 Page 5of12 a. Extended Detention proposed top of embankment width is 8-ft. The top of embankment is proposed to serve as vehicle access in support of maintenance needs. A width sufficient as safe to support this use and protect personnel is required. b. 3:1 slopes shown in profile view of proposed basin understate grade.Existing slopes are 2'1:1. GIS displays grade as 42%(vert./horiz: 24/57:contours 496'-472';36/86: 508'-472'). The most favorable least steep contours are 512-468',44'/121'/, or 36.4%. Slopes>3:1 affect design and review. c. Waiver to disturb preserved slopes(by right through legislative zoning action, 1 8-30.7.4.b.l.g)remains subject to design standards listed at 18-30.7.5.c.1. (#13,below). "Whenever vertical interval(height)of any 3:1 (thirty-three(33)percent)slope exceeds 30' reverse slopes, pushes untenable grade further past limits. d. Extended Detention design will be reviewed carefully under WPO application.Without details of basin, aquatic bench,forebay,primary/emergency spillways or pipe outfall, it is unclear if proposed SWM facility will impact proposed grade. e. Open Space may include SWM facilities(18-4.7, OPEN SPACE/b.)within limits(18-4.7,c.3.). Proposed SWM facility and preserved slopes occupy 90-95%of 0.85 Ac. Open space,which exceeds limits. Ref. Limitation on Certain Elements. f. Please furnish L x W dimension for basin access turnaround shown in schematic view, C3.0.0. Turnaround must allow service trucks larger than cars space to reverse and exit in a forward direction. g. Existing conditions: show contours below proposed detention basin at least as far as stream, elev. 460'+-. Show Fontana Drive, C2.0.0,C3.0.0, at least this far. Existing conditions include slope,road, and stream, each relevant to review. h. Hyland Ridge: Easement agreement with property to north is required to maintain drainage: basin to stream (14-431). i. Basin outfall—with WPO application, furnish details of ESC measures for primary spillway:basin to stream. 2-yr storm and bypass events may not concentrate flow(surface water)on the face of 2 1/2:1 preserved slopes(30.7.5.d). j. Sequence—with WPO application,outline steps for constructing sediment basin assumed to be coincident with extended detention basin location. Show ESC measures required to construct a basin while protecting streams and off-site areas. k. Show temporary construction easements. I. DEQ Stormwater Design Specification,Appendix A,Earthen Embankment,Ver. 1.0,March 1, 2011,defines height(p.1): PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez October 1,2014 Page 6 of 12 The height of an earthen embankment is the vertical distance from the natural bed of the stream or watercourse,measured at the downstream toe of the embankment,to the top of the embankment.If the embankment does not span a stream or watercourse,the height is the vertical distance between the lowest elevation,measured at the outside limit of the embankment,and the top of the embankment. For total height of embankment 25 or more feet,table(p.9)states minimum top width is 15-ft. —Link: http://www.vwrrc.vt.edu/swc/NonPBMPSpecsMarchll/Introduction App%20A_Earthen%20Embankments_SCrafto nRev 03012011.pdf Yet widening top of embankment creates steeper slopes.Request to widen embankment does not suggest downslope grade may exceed 3:1. Rather,requirements highlight need for alternative design or new SWM facility location,away from preserved slopes above Hyland Ridge. m.VDEQ Construction Specifications for Earthen Embankments(item k.)is referenced. Design considerations for site:Maintenance&Safety(p. 10/1.-4.,Link, above)—"a 6 to 10 foot wide bench should be provided at intervals of 10 to 15 feet of height,particularly if slopes are steeper than 3H:1 V";piping(p.8);soils investigation(p.3/1.-3);embankment stability(p.5/1.-3.).All considerations apply to proposed location. n. A geotechnical investigation is required for this location prior to final grading plan approval,and prior to preliminary plat approval(#17.c.,below). o. A.-N. may be read in context of adjacent properties, downstream resources,transfer of SWM maintenance responsibility to HOA,those who will maintain SWM facilities,and families of Fontana,and light of trust ordinance places in imperative need to evaluate design against risk. p. Water quality design criteria at 9VAC25-870-63 (Part II-B)or energy balance equation may offer relief from design or space constraints(item h.). [Links:http://albemarleengineer.blogspot.com/2014/02/how-to-avoid- fixing-inadequate.html VAC: http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legv604.exe?000+reg+9VAC25-870-63 ] [Code references: 18-8.5.5.2.e.—Applicability of chapter 17; 18-8.5.5.4.b/c,grading; 17-102.a./b./c.— purpose ch.17); 17-107—State laws; 18-30.7.1 —steep slopes overlay district; 14-104.A—(other) applicable requirements.] A. Preliminary Subdivision Plat(SUB201400063),cont.- PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENG INEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez Ns. `..'., October 1, 2014 Page 7 of 12 1) Please submit a separate road plan with an application. Please address on road plans the abrupt grade changes near the entrance of Belluno Lane and Brunello Ct. Show a sag curves. The road plans included on this preliminary subdivision plat will be thoroughly reviewed with the road plan application. Comment not addressed.This is a subdivision application. Please submit a road plan application for this project.(Rev. 1 )Comment response: Applicant indicates road plans are being prepared. 2) Please state on plan if roads are public or private.Also, label existing roads as public or private. Comment addressed. 3) The pedestrian paths for Phase 4C are not shown. Please clarify the trail location. The trails should show interconnection with other Fontana phases. Comment not addressed.Please show interconnectivity of trailways to existing Fontana Subdivision.(Rev.1)Comment addressed: Applicant response: "The trails have been resolved and approved by Amelia McCauley." 4) Proffer 5 states that pedestrian paths shall be Class A, Type 1 from the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual. Please show section detail. Comment not addressed.Please show interconnectivity of trailways to existing Fontana Subdivision.(Rev.1)Comment partially addressed; see item 3.As follow-up, two pedestrian section details are confusing. Class A type 1 trails occur not only on Via Florence. Select and revise a single trail typical section:retain Class A type 1 label and 10' corridor width—ACDSM,I.7.H. [Also,end doc] 5) Trails should be in common areas,and maintained through neighborhood covenants or private agreements. When not in common areas,all trails are required to have easements which must be a minimum of 10' wide. Comment addressed.Please show interconnectivity of trailways to existing Fontana Subdivision. (Rev.1)Comment partially addressed; see#4 above. Label trails and common areas, C3.1.0.,C4.1.1. 6) Brunello Court is proposed as 24' wide f/c to f/c. Are you proposing parking on one side or no parking at all?Please clarify. Comment partially addressed. Engineering still needs to meet with Planning to discuss road width.(Rev. 1) Comment addressed. 7) It is not clear why Belluno Lane is designed as a rural road with a ditch. The curb and gutter waiver request for Belluno Lane does not appear to have been approved by the Planning Commission or the BOS.Also,the road section on sheet C6.0.0 does not appear to meet VDOT road standards.Please revise to meet VDOT road standards from Appendix B(1)-14. Comment not addressed. This will need to be approved by the Board of Supervisors. (Rev. 1)Comment addressed. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENG INEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez October 1, 2014 Page 8of12 8) Previous comments mentioned that a waterline connection from the existing Ashcroft Subdivision may be necessary to achieve adequate fire flows. Please clarify if this is still the case. Comment addressed and applicant clarified waterline connections. 9) Driveways cannot be sloped greater than 10%. Please label all the driveways grades to clarify if proffer 2(G)is satisfied. Comment addressed. 10) Please note that the SWM and Drainage calcs will be thoroughly reviewed with a WPO application. An approval of this preliminary plat does not allow you to grade the site. An approved WPO application(E&S and SWM plans), along with posting of bonds will be required prior to obtaining a grading permit. Comment acknowledged by applicant.ACCD restates comment,which has been acknowledged. 11) Please show the approved pedestrian/emergency connector from the Cascadia Subdivision to Fontana 4C. This should match the approved ZMA2004-18. Comment not addressed.The R/W is shown to property line,but the design needs to be shown to the property line.Please discuss with the Planning Dept.(Rev. 1)Comment partially addressed; Applicant's response expressed legal position(ref response letter, 20-Aug-14): "The grantor, Fontana Land Trust,will convey upon demand..."Contours and design for the emergency connector from Cascadia Subdivision to Fontana (Phase 4C)must be shown on preliminary plat,and built prior to final plat approval. 12) Label the standard VDOT driveway aprons and show the detail. Comment addressed. 13) The critical slopes section in the ordinance has changed. A critical slopes waiver was already approved, but plans should meet Section 30.7.5 Design Standards. This is in conjunction with comment#17. Comment not fully addressed.Not all slopes are"managed slopes."Please refer to Albemarle GIS to clearly show all"preserved"and"managed"slopes on plan.Please note a critical slope waiver has already been approved for this project.(Rev. 1)Comment not addressed.Red. Pg. 1/c,Revise grading on preserved slopes in accordance with 18-30.7.5.c.1.Also, display managed/preserved steep slopes(drawing layers)on sheet C4.0.0,C4.1.0. 14) Please show SWM easements and access easements on plan. Comment not addressed.Please shoe the easement around the SWM facilities.A SWS agreement will need to be completed prior to the approval of the SUB application. (Rev. 1) Comment addressed. 15) Some trees on the landscaping plan are in conflict with the stormsewer pipes. Please address. Comment addressed. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez `sr ""•• October 1,2014 Page 9 of 12 16) It appears that the existing rip rap should be removed on the final grading plan.Please clarify. Comment addressed. 17) Please addressed the Final Grading Plan comments to satisfy Proffer 2: a. There appears to be a significant amount of 2:1 slopes behind lots as backyards.Proffer 2(D)calls for 3:1 slopes.Any slopes steeper than 3:1 up to 2:1 should be the last resort since ground cover will be harder to establish. Comment not addressed.The ZMA condition regarding the slopes was to develop the site with less steep slopes. The plan shows a significant amount of 2:1 slopes. (Rev.1)Comment not adequately addressed; response: "The amount of 2:1 slopes has been reduces(about 17%)by adding retaining walls and re-grading as requested by County Engineering."Retaining wall on Lots 23-27 eliminates some 2:1 slopes,but 2:1 slopes remain in this area and in back of Lots 29-33.Please consider ways to further limit or eliminate 2:1 slopes,consistent with proffer condition/Grading Plan. b. It will be difficult to grade and maintain the swales behind lots 19-27 and lots 14-18. These swales are too close to decks. This also assumes that homeowners will not regrade their own backyards. There are also areas that do not meet the"inlet for every 3 lot" policy. I recommend showing retaining walls to provide backyards for lots and showing easements for swales along the retaining wall. Comment not address. Provide an inlet between lot 22 and lot 109.Also,there was no attempt to address reducing the steep slopes. This is in conjunction with comment 17 a. (Rev. 1)Comment partially addressed.As follow-up, please select line weight, symbol,or dash lines/arrows appear to show flow lines,but may indicate swales. HP(highpoint)/berm labels provide clues but not enough clarity for review for construction. If ditch section applies to berm or swales, it is unclear. Three terms lend confusion as to what, exactly, ditch section applies to. Please clarify plan view features(berm/swales/ditches);tie each to berm, swale, or ditch detail. Provide cross sections of drainage features at points along berm/swale on Lots 21,23,25,C4.0.0. c. Please note the final grading plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to the approval of the first preliminary subdivision plat. Comment acknowledged. (Rev. 1) ACCD restates comment,which has been acknowledged. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez October 1, 2014 Page 10 of 12 d. On Brunello Court,there is a low point near station 14+50. Please label the elevation on Sheet C4.0.1. It appears this area will need to address relief for lots 23, 24, and 31 if inlets are clogged. Comment not fully addressed.Please provide inlets on both sides of the road at low spot.(Rev. 1) Comment substantively addressed.As follow-up, relocate curb inlet, Lot 31,which conflicts with driveway entrance. e. Clarify stormsewer behind lots 30-34. There is only one inlet between lots 29-30. Capture as much of the impervious area into the stormsewer. It appears that a substantial berm may be needed to divert drainage from steep slopes to the SWM facility Comment not addressed. Applicant has designed the roofs of lot 29-34 to drain to the stormsewer pipes.Roof drains to stormsewer pipes cannot handle the 10 year storm.Provide a swale to capture more runoff to grate inlets behind lots.(Rev. 1)Comment addressed.As follow-up, see 17.b., above;there is need for clarity with respect to swales, berms, and ditches. f. There is a proposed swale and berm behind lots 1-5. It appears grading will be beyond the property line. Please address and obtain permission from adjacent property owners. Comment addressed. g. Clarify where runoff for single family dwellings will be diverted for lot 5-11. Will it be towards fronts of homes or released in backyards?Comment addressed. New Comment: 18) Please note that the extended detention basin and bio filter is not approved under this application. This will be revised with a WPO application. (Rev. 1)Comment noted.ACCD restates comment, which has been noted. 19) Applicant has the option to use the new runoff reduction method that will be in effect on July 1, 2014. (Rev. 1)Comment noted. New Rev. 1: 20) Please include note with trail section detail; from ACDSM: PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez ti►" 7•f October 1,2014 ; Page 11 of 12 Drainage provisions where referenced above are to follow VDOT standards for a 2 year design storm.Concentrated runoff must not run across the trail,and culverts or footbridges are to be provided,especially where the trail crosses ditches.Where the trail crosses swampy areas, provisions such as boardwalks are to be provided for a dry surface.Where a non-paved surface is used,trail breaks and erosion prevention measures must be used on grades above 7%to prevent repeated washout of the surface. 21) Label BW elevations for corresponding TW elevations for walls behind Lots 23-17,and Lots 29-30. 22) Drive entrances, lots 12-18, Via Florence Road, intersect street without curved dimension;please revise per detail below,r=12'. [VDOT Road Design Manual,Appendix B, Subdivision Street Design Guide, Sec. B-4, H. 3. Private Entrance Detail] Link: http://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/appendb.pdf 23) Retaining wall,Lot 29, is 8' high in one location(TW 556.0; C4.0.0). 18-30.7.5.a./1,2 proscribes retaining walls>6' on preserved slopes. Propose alternative design. 24) Furnish detail for proposed yard inlet(typical). 25) Show and label flow lines as swale/berm(C4.1.0)across back yards of Lots 4, 3,2. Define drainage on Lot 3,especially,to indicate storm runoff reached yard inlet on Lot 2,rather than releasing onto the Ashcroft Development. 26) C4.1.1,Belluno Lane: Ascending steep grade(400')may require additional inlets. (The road plans included on this preliminary subdivision plat will be thoroughly reviewed with the road plan application—see#1, above). 27) 4H:1 V slope beyond Belluno Lane(C4.1.1, sta. 15+20)may present driveway(max grade)design challenge. Recommend ensure driveway grade,Lot 5,meets Proffer Grade Plan. 28) Furnish guardrail on Brunello Court and Fontana Drive Ext. as vehicular barrier above proposed 2:1 slopes above proposed extended detention SWM facility, C4.0.0. VDOT Comments: Concerning VDOT's comments,again from clarity,we have included the original comments and our responses in italicized print as follows: 1.As previously noted and acknowledged, storm sewer calculation,open channel calculation, storm sewer profiles, and pavement design calculations need to be provided for review.Approval of the preliminary plat will by no means be an approval for road and storm sewer/drainage channel design. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING WWW.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez "'d October 1,2014 Page 12 of 12 Noted. The grading shown on the Preliminary Plat was developed as final grading. The final computations are in progress and will be provided with the final plans. 2.The roadway typical section should indicate whether there will be on-street parking on one or both sides of the street. Also, if there will be on-street parking on one side only, it should be indicated which side of the street will have on-street parking. Please note that 29' face of curb to face of curb at this location will meet VDOT standards for parking on both sides of the street,however,this does not satisfy the minimum width requirement for parking on both sides of the street to accommodate fire and rescue.A note was added for parking on right side of street only. 3. There should be a minimum of 90°between the upstream and downstream storm sewer pipes at each structure. It appears that there is less than 90°at structure between lots 21 and 22 on Brunello Court.Manhole was moved along downstream pipe to achieve 90 degree pipe angle. 4. It appears that there is a conflict between the proposed entrance and the proposed storm structure at lot 31 on Brunello Court. This inlet is not a curb drop inlet, but rather a surface grate inlet at flow line elevation. It does not conflict with driveway. 5. Rather than connecting to the proposed storm sewer system, it appears that it would be better to have a culvert under Belluno Lane at the connection with Via Florence Road. The entrance angel to the culvert currently shown on the preliminary plat is more severe than what is typically desirable. I believe we are required to treat Section 1 stormwater per County Engineering. Please let us know if that's not the case. 6. It appears that the outlet from the proposed detention pond at the intersection of Belluno Lane and Via Florence Road will create an obstruction in the roadside ditch along Via Florence Road,potentially impacting the hydraulics of the roadside ditch. It would be preferable to have the outlet shop short of the roadside ditch. Pipe was moved back away from ditch 5 feet. 7. The typical section for the connection to Cascadia needs to be determined so that we can verify that 40' of right-of-way is adequate. Please note that for a subdivision street that will be brought into the secondary system for maintenance with less than 2,000 vehicles per day,no on-street parking,curb and gutter, street trees and sidewalk on each side of the street requires at a minimum 49' of right-of-way, i.e., 50' typically.See response to County item 9 above. 8. It appears that there should be standard CD-1's at approximately stations 10+50, 10+80, 12+50 and 13+00 of Brunello Court.Additional CD-1's added. 9.Adequacy of the proposed pavement design will need to be verified by pavement design calculations.Please note that the Pavement Design Guide for Subdivision and Secondary Roads in Virginia has been revised and the 2014 version should be used for pavement design. To be provided. 10.Additional comments may be provided during the road plan review process. Noted We are continuing with this process.Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Steven L. Driver,PE,LS PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher Perez From: Steve Driver[sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 9:17 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Chris, To avoid an additional submittal fee for the applicant,we will resubmit the Preliminary Plat today.We're addressing as many comments as we can. So yes have staff continue their review. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft,VA 24477 PH: (434)244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez @albemarle.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 4:49 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Steve, See my responses to each of your questions below in red. Christopher P,Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road!Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverCaterraengineering.net] Sent:Tuesday, September 30, 2014 1:33 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Chris, We counted 15 calendar days and got October 1,2014. Please confirm. Yes, I confirm that Oct 1st is the deadline for. the 15 days from the disapproval letter. 1 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 4:49 PM To: 'Steve Driver' Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Steve, See my responses to each of your questions below in red. Christopher P.Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 1:33 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Anthony Eshleman'; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Chris, We counted 15 calendar days and got October 1,2014. Please confirm. Yes, I confirm that Oct 1st is the deadline for the 15 days from the disapproval letter. To calculate these types of dates I like to use the following website calculator: http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadded.html?m 1=9&d 1=16&y 1=2014&type=add&ay=&am=&aw=&ad= 15 Unless we hear otherwise from you, based on #1) below,we will resubmit tomorrow by 4:30 pm as you have required to avoid additional submittal fees. As previously mentioned in the email below, I have reviewed the ordinance and I see no way to extend the 15 day limit for resubmittal. However, if you resubmit within the 15 days (by Oct 1), you could then request a deferral for up to 6 months to work on the project. This office is open from Sam—5pm. The 4:30pm time slot mentioned above will be fine to resubmit. When you resubmit tomorrow, do you plan on requesting the deferral as well?If so, please specify how much time you request for deferral (up to 6 months). Or do you want staff to continue the review. However,we are still awaiting responses to questions asked in the review meeting last Thursday, 9-25-14. You asked about phasing the plat(into 3 phases)—I have posed this question to Zoning for a finding as to whether or not it is permissible under proffer 2. After reading the proffer, I do not think it is permissible, but Zoning is responsible for interpreting the proffers. Thus I'm pending their answer to this question. Once I receive word from Zoning on this I'll respond with the answer and how to proceed. However,we are still awaiting responses to questions asked in the review meeting last Thursday, 9-25-14. Looking over your notes from the Sept 25th meeting I see one other potential question that you may be waiting on additional guidance from staff on, possibly#4 from your notes; the Cascadia Connector Road. Staff has discussed this requirement in previous comment letters, and most recently in the September 16, 2014 comment letter, as comment#9 (see below in blue). 1 At your request I shall provide further discussions of this item. During the rezoning of Fontana 4C previous iterations of your clients proffers provided for this connection in the form of a proffer; however, this proffer was required to be removed because it duplicated the requirement of the subdivision ordinance (sec 14-409), as such the proffers were revised to exclude that requirement and relied on the ordinance for the connection. During the rezoning your client requested a waiver for 14-409 to NOT make the connection. The Planning Commission did not approve this waiver, nor any other waivers provided for in the subdivision ordinance. When the proposal went to the Board of Supervisors, the Board approved the rezoning but did not approve any of the requested subdivision waivers. Thus the requirement is being driven by the subdivision ordinance. If your client would like to seek the waiver(in the form of an exception or variation)to the requirement of 14-409, such a request shall be provided by the applicant,the appropriate fee shall be paid, and the item shall be sent to the Planning Commission for review/approval. "[ZMA2004-18, 14-409] The Cascadia Connector (pedestrian and emergency access) located in Phase 4C Section 3 shall connect to Fontana Drive and be built to the property line. Revise the preliminary plat to depict this connector road, to include road width. Design of this road shall be a part of the road plan for Phase 4C. Also, on the final plat there shall be a note for this road which states: "Reserved for dedication on demand by the County for a public road connection between Fontana and Cascadia. This access way shall not be used for construction traffic. " Rev 2. The Cascadia connector has been depicted on the preliminary plat as a 40 foot R/W; however,the R/W shall be a minimum of 50 foot wide to meet VDOT requirements for the public road design. As such, the road plan shall dictate the specific design of the public road. The design of the road is needed for an overlot grading plan to be approved by Engineering, as grading is going to take place with the construction of this road. The Cascadia Connector(pedestrian and emergency access) located in Phase 4C Section 3 shall connect to Fontana Drive and be built to the property line or bonded prior to final subdivision plat approval. This item shall be a condition of final subdivision plat approval. In the applicant's response letter they state that the road shall be built and designed by Cascadia. The County does not dictate who builds the road, as long as it's built or bonded. Please note that only the property owner can bond the approved road. The final plat for Fontana cannot be approved till it's built or bonded. (If) the applicant would like to seek an exception or variation to the requirement of 14-409, such a request shall be provided by the applicant, the appropriate fee shall be paid, and the item shall be sent to the Planning Commission for review/approval." Please copy Anthony Eshleman with responses, in the event I'm out of the office. Anthony Eshleman has been CCed to this email. Again this time frame is unreasonable as the earliest the County would schedule a time to meet was 9-25- 14, 6 calendar days (4 business days) from the deadline. -Disapproval letter went out 9-16-14 -The applicant contacted Planning staff on 9-18-14 to set up a meeting w/Engineering -Planning staff contacted Engineering the same day,John Anderson set the meeting up w/Steve Driver for 9-25-14 on 9-18-14. 2 Steve was ok with this meetingt e. ...- - Staff met w/the applicant on 9-25-14 I will be on my way to RIC to pick up my wife at the airport. Back in office tomorrow morning. Ok. I'll get back with you tomorrow regarding the $200 check. Ok. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez@ albemarle.orq] Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 4:59 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; Glenn Brooks; David Benish; Bill Fritz Subject: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Mr. Driver, This email is to follow up the meeting from Sept 25th in which you asked a couple questions about Fontana 4C and process. 1) You asked how you could extend the 15 days you have to resubmit the disapproved plat - I have reviewed the ordinance and I see no way to extend the 15 day limit for resubmittal. However, if you resubmit within the 15 days, you could then request a deferral for up to 6 months to work on the project. 2) You asked about phasing the plat(into 3 phases)—I have posed this question to Zoning for a finding as to whether or not it is permissible under proffer 2. I'm pending their answer to this question. Once I receive word from Zoning on this I'll respond with the answer and how to proceed. In an unrelated item, Mr. Nichols brought in a$200 check on September 23; however, staff is unable to determine what the fee is for. There are no outstanding balances on the subdivision plat that would need this fee. Was the fee for a road plan or an E&S plan? If staff cannot pinpoint what this fee is to be applied to, we'll have to issue a refund of it to Mr. Nichols. Please advise what this fee was for. Thanks Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 3 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 4:59 PM To: 'Steve Driver' Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; Glenn Brooks; David Benish; Bill Fritz Subject: SUB2014-63 Fontana 4C and process questions Mr. Driver, This email is to follow up the meeting from Sept 25th in which you asked a couple questions about Fontana 4C and process. 1)You asked how you could extend the 15 days you have to resubmit the disapproved plat - I have reviewed the ordinance and I see no way to extend the 15 day limit for resubmittal. However, if you resubmit within the 15 days, you could then request a deferral for up to 6 months to work on the project. 2)You asked about phasing the plat (into 3 phases)—I have posed this question to Zoning for a finding as to whether or not it is permissible under proffer 2. I'm pending their answer to this question. Once I receive word from Zoning on this I'll respond with the answer and how to proceed. In an unrelated item, Mr. Nichols brought in a$200 check on September 23; however, staff is unable to determine what the fee is for. There are no outstanding balances on the subdivision plat that would need this fee. Was the fee for a road plan or an E&S plan? If staff cannot pinpoint what this fee is to be applied to, we'll have to issue a refund of it to Mr. Nichols. Please advise what this fee was for. Thanks Christopher P.Perez 1 Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle.Virginia 401 McIntire Road i Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 1 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 8:40 AM To: Glenn Brooks; John Anderson Cc: Michelle Roberge; Max Greene; Bill Fritz; David Benish Subject: FW: Fontana 4C Prel Plat Meeting minutes Attachments: 2014-09-29, Preliminary Plat Meeting Minutes.pdf John/Glenn, Steve Driver has drafted up minutes from our Sept 25th Engineering meeting and requested I send them to all at the meeting. The minutes have a list of follow up questions he's waiting on answers to. Please take a look at it. Thanks "hrkto,3her P. Perez!Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle.Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville.VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 9:53 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: Fontana 4C Prel Plat Meeting minutes Chris, Attached are meeting minutes. Please let us know within three days if any corrections are needed. «..,» Please distribute to all attendees. I didn't get a complete list of all who were there. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 1 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 2 \TERRA ENGINEERING AND 2374 s uARTS DRAFT HIGN\VAY,ST'UARTS DRAFT.VA 24477 PM(540)337-4591 FAX {540}337-5291 LAND SOLUTIONS, PC Meeting Minutes Meeting: Fontana 4C Preliminary Plat review Date: September 25, 2014, 3:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Parties Present: County of Albemarle: Glenn Brooks, John Anderson, Max Green, Michele Roberge, Engineering Chris Perez, Planning Et.al VDOT: Troy Austin Terra Engineering: Steve Driver Meeting Purpose: To discuss the many comments from the last review. Item and discussion (in italics): 1. Ti rame teve indicated that the time frame to complete plan revisions, fifteen (15) days, was not reasonable. -14 v.� Chris Perez was going to check on that and get back. 2. Section 3 SWM. Steve explained that the intent of the ordinance is not to preclude use of 2:1 slopes for basin design. That this is generally accepted practice. A series of terraced walls around the basin was discussed with John to break up 2:1 slopes. John indicated that he felt that the SWM could be grandfathered since the original design predated the new SWM regs. Steve indicated that the SWM discharge channel was previously resolved with Phil Custer by providing adequate channel calcs for the existing rip rap channel and discharging the basin flow into that channel. Phil also had previously asked that the channel be shown on the plans and we pointed out that it is still shown on the plans. John indicated that he planned to make a field visit to verify that the channel was there. PLANNING•CIVIL ENGINEERING•LAND SURVEYING WWW.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Fontana 4C Preliminary Plat Review Meeting 09-25-2014 John asked to re-submit previous preliminary pond comps, BMP worksheets, and adequate channel comps that were previously requested, reviewed and accepted by Phil Custer. Regarding topo in the area, Steve suggested that the Hyland Ridge developer likely would not give approval for the applicant to come onto his land. We discussed the option of providing some data based on the Hyland Ridge plans. Steve indicated that the as-built for Fontana Drive Extension revealed constructed road grades very near plan grades. 3. Section 3 Retaining Walls. Steve stated that the applicant added more walls with the last submission which were thought to be unnecessary, to reduce the quantity of 2:1 slopes. John suggested adding another wall offset from the property line and at the toe of slope behind lots 31, 32, and 33 to eliminate the remaining 2:1 slopes in that area. Steve indicated that the proffer does not preclude the use of some 2:1 slopes, but rather leaves it open at the discretion of the County engineer. The applicant is of the opinion the County Engineer is not being reasonable in trying to eliminate all 2:1 slopes by building multiple retaining walls. Steve indicated that no matter what is proposed on these lots, the grading plan is likely to change since the County has little to no control over what footprint each builder chooses. It may well be very different that what's shown on the grading plan. This is the bases for asking County engineering not to require "overdesign"of the lots at this time particularly when the proffer allows for some give and take. The proffer has a provision for changing the grading plan after approval, so overdesign at this point is not warranted. 4. Casc a Connector Road eve indicated that the applicant wants in writing why he is required to design and build this road when only the condition on him was to grant the right-of-way on demand. He doesn't recall being required to design and built Cascadia's road. Chris responded by saying he thought he had already don this. s ■S � s ,� -f el / l'( (�.,,�-}/e4 # /71/ /s+-re , 41'7 "? jy 5. Project Phasing Cow--f - t5 The applicant wanted to know if the project could be phased. Section 1 (the lots that front on the existing Via Florence) and Section 2 (11 lots next to Ashcroft) where the design appears to be very close to acceptance, would allow the project to proceed in a more timely manner. The ideal is that Sections 1 and 2 could be processed in a timelier manner ahead of Section 3, to allow the project to go forward in the least time, while the issues in Section 3 are being worked out. For Section 2, Steve indicated to Troy Austin that the pipe near the ditch line could be adjusted so as not to block the water flow in the ditch. Page 2 MANNING t CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING WW W.TERRAENGINEERING.N ET "we Fontana 4C Preliminary Plat Review Meeting 09-25-2014 / County staff was to look into that request and get back. .1-y.-. ' et-re+ ." w.v,Z„�, ,,t,..7,4, isSl+¢ . 6e.su rat5Po.-'J. The meeting adjourned after about% hour and Steve congratu ating Michele on the birth of her firstborn. Congratulations Michele O. The short time allotted by the County for this meeting was not reasonable given the number of issues and comments that required discussion and the short time frame (15 days) over which all of the comments had to be addressed. County staff appeared to be helpful, particularly John Anderson. Many others did not speak. There was not adequate time for that. , . *rsj.4-, ., t U �Zs - t u rn �,, . 5 tire 401, I SId- (S I 'lcGv /Pkl yr t �{ -, , / \ J iJ k V i0, (y • jv IBS 4-1,2_ .i,..,$3. , S t,:-__ _____, —1.1),,rv‘ , ___,. 7 Ii„, , uy _30 ,„,,.... i,.. ---r-6._ ke4-4-- 30 ,,(, t..),,,s -04K \k-)/,' 40.7.-/kr .,3._e_e_,I, piti&_14074t. s &c6.ueJ (D evi,_ fug 4,4 /t // / / J ,i7 .tee/. W� e-4 4,` 11.,4-1)Caw gp?4-4,1S. 444"C-- e (,z Page 3 PLANNING*CIVIL ENGINEERING 4 LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET *Ow Vie Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 8:41 AM To: 'Steve Driver' Cc: John Anderson Subject: SUB-2014-00063 Fontana 4C Preliminary Plat Attachments: SUB-2014-00063 Fontana Phase 4C - Preliminary Plat Comments-9-17-14.pdf Steve, SUB201400063: Fontana Phase 4C - Preliminary Subdivision Plat Attached is VDOT's comments. These are available in Countyview too. You now have all comments from all reviewers. Christopher P.Perez;Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle.Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Austin, Nathran. (VDOT) [mailto:Nathran.AustinCalvdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 8:28 AM To: Christopher Perez Subject: SUB-2014-00063 Fontana 4C Preliminary Plat Troy Austin, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Charlottesville Residency 701 VDOT Way Charlottesville,VA 22911 Phone: (434)422-9782 Fax: (434) 984-1521 1 w � Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 3:38 PM To: 'Steve Driver' Subject: SUB201400063: Fontana Phase 4C- Preliminary Subdivision Plat Steve, SUB201400063: Fontana Phase 4C - Preliminary Subdivision Plat The email below are ACSA's comments. These are available in Countyview too. Also, I just spoke to VDOT and they hope to have their comments finalized for you tomorrow. Christopher t'. Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development ICounty of Albemarle.Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Alex Morrison [mailto:amorrison @alserviceauthoritv.orq] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 2:00 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: SUB201400063: Fontana Phase 4C- Preliminary Subdivision Plat Chris, I have reviewed the above referenced plat. I hereby recommend approval of the preliminary plat with the following conditions: • Submit 3 copies of the final site plan along with water/sewer data sheets directly to the ACSA(Attn:Jeremy Lynn, P.E.)for construction review and approval. • Lots 12-18 will require private PRV's. • Lots 19-34 may require private PRV's. • All taps must be single taps. • Include the current ACSA General Conditions • Include any relevant profiles and details. Alexander J. Morrison, EIT Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville,Virginia 22911 (0)434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (F)434-979-0698 Like the ACSA on Facebook at www.facebook.com/acsaconnect 1 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 4:52 PM To: 'Steve Driver' Subject: RE: SUB201400063 Fontana- Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Attachments: ZMA2004-18 proffers.pdf Steve, As requested attached is a PDF copy of the approved ZMA/application plan. Christopher P. Perez!Senior Planner Department of Community Development!County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @ terraengineering.net] Sent:Tuesday, September 16, 2014 4:40 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: RE: SUB201400063 Fontana - Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Hi Chris, Please send us a PDF copy of the County approved rezoning plan. I think it was approved in 2008. You should have a copy of it. We need it to address Preliminary Plat comments. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, FE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperezalbemarle.orq] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 1:17 PM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Steve Driver Subject: SUB201400063 Fontana— Phase 4C Preliminary Subdivision Plat Mr.Nichols, Staff has completed their review of SUB2014-63 Fontana—Phase 4C—prelim plat, attached is the action letter for the proposal titled: "SUB2014-63 Fontana—Phase 4C—Prelim Plat—Disapproval 9-16-14.pdf'. 1 This letter will also be sent to you via hard copy mail, and is available in Countyview. If you have any questions about the letter please give me a call. Also, attached are all the comments on the revised plat titled: "9-16-14 CD2 Fontana Phase 4C prelim sub plat SUB2014-63.pdf', which contains comments from various reviewers. These are also available in Countyview. VDOT and ACSA comments will be provided to the applicant once they are received. Also, below is some additional guidance provided by the Engineering Department to obtain a final grading plan. The preliminary plat, a subdivision design, must meet road, WPO/VSMP, and proffer conditions. We have not received a road or WPO application. Prelim plat comments anticipate road and WPO requirements. Road and SWM facilities include grading; the proposed SWM facility requires grading preserved steep slopes. We need WPO and road plan applications for Fontana 4C. (This is an unusual case, in that there is such detail needed on a preliminary plan, simply because an approved over-lot grading plan, as proffered, is not really possible without finalizing a lot of details in other areas.) In an effort to help the applicant obtain a final grading plan,please accept this short list of possible design options that may help ensure overlot grading approval. We cannot promise since we have not received road or WPO applications. We have reviewed grading included with preliminary plat. This list relates to items shown or not shown on preliminary plat: A. Eliminate 2:1 slopes on lots 29-33. Retaining wall revision should meet standards at §30.7.5 (stepped wall requirements apply if wall ht. >6'). B. Eliminate 2:1 slopes on lots 23-27 and Lot 14. C. Propose a different stormwater management layout that does not require such extensive use of steep slopes. The new VSMP requirements encourage a different approach altogether, emphasizing infiltration techniques over large basins. Even if one end-of-pipe solution is still possible, after examination of the new standards, a different facility would improve the grading plan. For example, an underground SWM facility, which we have seen under similar circumstances, would allow easier grades. D. Direct SWM facility outfall and discharge through Fontana property, and/or obtain an easement to discharge through Hyland Ridge Subdivision property. This appears essential, as there does not appear to be public easement to discharge through adjacent property to the creek. It would appear necessary to bore under the road, and discharge on property owned by the applicant. It is not clear if a channel to the creek is available in either case, and this would be needed. E. Show contours and design of emergency connector with Cascadia Subdivision. This improvement is to be built with Fontana 4C development, platted with subdivision improvements. Ref. Cascadia Connector Road, sheet C4.0.0. This is a part of the grading plan, and would appear to involve construction on steep slopes. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development 'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 2 Christopher Perez From: David Benish Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 10:31 AM To: Todd Shifflett Cc: Christopher Perez; John Anderson Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana Phase 4C waiver refund request Todd, Please refund the $540 waiver fees noted below to the applicant.Thanks. David From: Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 9:39 AM To: David Benish; John Anderson; Todd Shifflett Subject: SUB2014-63 Fontana Phase 4C waiver refund request David, I have an applicant, Steve Driver of Fontana 4C, requesting a refund of the waiver they applied and paid for under SUB2014-63 Fontana Phase 4C. The waiver fee they paid was $540 -waiver fee for exception to [14- 410(H)&(I), 14-422(E) & (F)] Standards for all streets and alleys. I feel it's appropriate to refund this money as no staff time was dedicated to the review of the waiver because the applicant requested staff hold off from reviewing the waiver till they resubmit the prelim plat. Upon resubmittal of the prelim plat they decided to not seek a waiver after all, and just revised the plan to meet the requirements. Thus we never did any work on the waiver. Thus I am requesting we move forward with that refund upon the applicants request. Also,the applicant recently submitted road plans under SUB2014-141_Fontana 4C Road Plans; however, no fees have been paid for the road plan review. Rather they provided a note on the road plan application requesting we roll the waiver fee (discussed above)which is to be refunded over to cover the road plan review. After speaking with intake (Todd)they say it is not something they would do, rather,the applicant needs to pay the road plan fee with a new check, and we'll move forward with the refund separately. John please coordinate the road plan fees along with your request for additional plan sets. Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development;County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 Mc[ntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: John Anderson Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 5:27 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Christopher Perez; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C -Road Plan Steve, I tried to call, but missed you. When you get back, please call to discuss road plans for Fontana 4C. I will be asked to review the preliminary plat, which has been re-submitted, but separately, I need 5 copies of a road plan for 4C,or three copies if you submit directly to ACF&R,ACSA. I will distribute to VDOT, Planning. The road plan requires more information than shown on the prelim plat, but at the same time,certain sheets should be removed. Please see Michelle Roberge's preliminary plat comments d.June 20, 2014, Item A. 1. Thank you,Steve- 1 TERRA ENGINEERING ` ,,�.� AND 2374 STUARTS DRAFT HIGHWAY,STUARTS DRAFT,VA 24477 jLAND SOLUTIONS, PC PH.(540)337-4591 FAX (540)337-5291 August 20, 2014 Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Rd,North Wing Charlottesville,VA 22902 RE: Fontana,Phase 4 SUB2014-63 Chris: As you know,the applicant is seeking Preliminary Plat approval at the earliest possible date. Much work went into addressing the last round of comments. In addressing these comments we have met with you,Michele Roberge, Glenn Brooks,John Anderson,Max Greene,Bill Fritz, and Troy Austin.The final trail locations have been resolved with Amelia McCauley via email and are shown on the plat along with construction details. We have revised the design as requested and have eliminated any need for Planning Commission or Board of Supervisor action to obtain approvals. For clarity,we've provided the June 20, 2014 comments and responses in italicized print. These revisions are the result of two meetings with County and VDOT personnel and numerous emails. Engineering comments: A. Preliminary Subdivision Plat(SUB201400063) 1) Please submit a separate road plan with an application.Please address on road plans the abrupt grade changes near the entrance of Belluno Lane and Brunello Ct. Show sag curves. The road plans included on this preliminary subdivision plat will be thoroughly reviewed with the road plan application. Comment not addressed.This is a subdivision application.Please submit a road plan application for this project. To address this comment, we met with Troy Austin, VDOT, on August 1, 2014. The road entrance landings and profile revisions are based on that meeting.A road plan application provided by Chris Perez is included. 2) Please state on plans if roads are public or private. Also, label existing roads as public or private. Comment addressed. 3) The pedestrian paths for Phase 4C are not shown. Please clarify the trail location. The trails should show interconnection with other Fontana phases. Comment not addressed.Pleases show interconnectivity of trailways to existing Fontana Subdivision. The trails have been resolved and approved by Amelia McCauley. They have been added to the plat accordingly. 4) Proffer 5 states that pedestrian paths shall be Class A, Type 1 from the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual. Please show section detail. Comment not addressed.Please show interconnectivity of trailways to existing Fontana Subdivision. Trail details have been added to the plat. Also, see item 3 response. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING*LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez August 20, 2014 'e' Page 2 of 5 5) Trails should be in common areas, and maintained through neighborhood covenants or private agreements. When not in common areas, all trails are required to have easements which must be a minimum of 10' wide. Comment not addressed.Please show interconnectivity of trailways to existing Fontana Subdivision. See item 3 response. All new trails are in common areas, 10'wide. 6) Brunello Court is proposed as 24' wide f/c to f/c.Are you proposing parking on one side or no parking at all? Please clarify. Comment partially addressed.Engineering still needs to meet with Planning to discuss road width. Brunello Court road section was revised to 29'f/f at the request of County Engineering and Planning to allow street side parking. 7) It is not clear why Brunello Lane is designed as a rural road with a ditch.The curb and gutter waiver request for Brunello Lane does not appear to have been approved by the Planning Commission or BOS. Also,the road section on sheet C6.0.0 does not appear to meet VDOT road standards. Please revise to meet VDOT road standards from Appendix B(1)-14. Comment not addressed.This will need to be approved by the Board of Supervisors. Belluno Lane road section was revised to urban and 29'f/f. 8) Previous comments mentioned that a waterline connection from the existing Ashcroft Subdivision may be necessary to achieve adequate fire flows.Please clarify if this is still the case. Comment addressed and application clarified waterline connections. 9) Driveways cannot be sloped greater than 10%. Please label all the driveway grades to clarify if proffer 2(G) is satisfied. Comment addressed. 10) Please note that the SWM and Drainage calcs will be thoroughly reviewed with a WPO application. An approval of this preliminary plat does not allow you to grade the site.An approved WPO application(E&S and SWM plans), along with posting of bonds will be required prior to obtaining a grading permit. Comment acknowledged by applicant. 11)Please show the approved pedestrian/emergency connector from the Cascadia Subdivision to Fontana 4C. This should match the approved ZMA2004-18. Comment not addressed.The R/W is shown to property line,but the design needs to be shown to the property line.Please discuss with the Planning Dept. The grantor, Fontana Land Trust, will convey upon demand by the County, a strip of land 40'wide over Fontana lands, to the grantee, the Cascadia developer,for use to construct an emergency road/pedestrian connection required by the County for the Cascadia Development. The design of that road needs to be provided by the grantee, Cascadia developer,for review by the grantor, Fontana Land Trust, and submitted to Albemarle County Engineering for review and approval. It is recognized that the emergency road/pedestrian connection across Fontana Lands will encumber Lot A and the existing driveway and utilities for Lot 118. 12)Label the standard VDOT driveway aprons and show the detail. Comment addressed. 13) The critical slopes section in the ordinance has changed.A critical slopes waiver was already approved,but plans should meet Section 30.7.5 Design Standards.This is in conjunction with comment#17. PLANNING+CIVIL ENGINEERING+LAND SURVEYING WWW.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez August 20, 2014 Page 3 of 5 Comment not fully addressed.Not all slopes are"managed slopes."Please refer to Albermarle GIS to clearly show all "preserved"and "managed"slopes on plan.Please note a critical slope waiver has already been approved for this project. The preserved and managed slopes are now labeled according to the Albemarle GIS. 14) Please show SWM easements and access easements on plan. Comment not addressed.Please show the easement around the SWM facilities.A SWM agreement will need to be completed prior to the approval of the SUB application. The SWM Easements have been labeled on the plat. 15) Some trees on the landscaping plan are in conflict with the stormsewer pipes. Please address. Comment addressed. 16) It appears that the existing rip rap should be removed on final grading plan. Please clarify. Comment addressed. 17) Please address the Final Grading Plan comments to satisfy Proffer 2: a. There appears to be a significant amount of 2:1 slopes behind lots as backyards.Proffer 2(D)calls for 3:1 slopes. Any slopes steeper than 3:1 up to 2:1 should be the last resort since ground cover will be harder to establish. Comment not addressed,The ZMA condition regarding the slopes was to develop the site with less steep slopes.The plan shows a significant amount of 2:1 slopes. The amount of 2:1 slopes has been reduced(about 17%) by adding retaining walls and regrading as requested by County Engineering. b. It will be difficult to grade and maintain the swales behind lots 19-27 and lots 14-18. These swales are too close to decks. This also assumes that homeowners will not regrade their own backyards. There are also areas that do not meet the"inlet for every 3 lot"policy. I recommend showing retaining walls to provide backyards for lots and showing easements for swales along retaining wall. Comment not addressed.Provide an inlet between lot 22 and lot 109.Also,there was no attempt to address reducing the steep slopes. This is in conjunction with comment 17 a. The yard swales have been moved further from the decks by re-grading and using retaining walls as requested by County Engineering. The swales are relatively flat and, by design, carry minimal water, requiring little to no maintenance. The grading and drainage design now meets the inlet for every 3 lot policy. An inlet was added between lot 22 and lot 109. See response to 17a above. c. Please note the final grading plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to the approval of the first preliminary subdivision plat. Comment acknowledged. d. On Brunello Court,there is a low point near station 14+50. Please label the elevation on Sheet C4.0.1. It appears this area will need to address relief for lots 23, 24,and 31 if inlets are clogged. Comment not fully addressed.Please provide inlets on both sides of road at low spot. Inlets are shown at the low spot on both sides of road at station 14+53.42. The nearby house elevations have been checked to insure they are higher than road crest flow line overflow elevation of 557.08. The lowest adjacent house garage elevation is on lot 31 and is at a safe higher elevation of 557.80. e. Clarify stormsewer behind lots 30-34. There is only one inlet between lots 29-30. Capture as PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING+LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET unristopner r. rerez August 20, 2014 , Page 4 of 5 much of the impervious area into the stormsewer. It appears that a substantial berm may be needed to divert drainage from steep slopes to the SWM facility. Comment not addressed.Applicant has designed the roofs of lots 29-34 to drain to the stormsewer pipes.Roof drains to stormsewer pipes cannot handle the 10 year storm. Provide a swale to capture more runoff to grate inlets behind lots. The storm drain has been revised behind lots 30-34 to increase the number of inlets to capture the maximum amount of runoff from the houses.Also a side-hill swale berm was added to catch all of the10 year storm roof runoff and direct it into the added inlets. It was necessary to steepen the slopes below the berm to incorporate the hillside bench, but all slopes between the houses and berm are now 3:1 or less, making for improved backyards. Note that many independently dispersed areas of 2:1 slope throughout the project have been eliminated. f. There is a proposed swale and berm behind lots 1-5.It appears grading will be beyond the property line.Please address and obtain permission from adjacent property owners. Comment addressed. g. Clarify where runoff for single family dwellings will be diverted for lots 5-11. Will it be towards front of homes or released in backyards? Comment clarified. New Comment: 18) Please note that the extended detention basin and biofilter is not approved under this application. This will be reviewed with a WPO application. Noted. 19)Applicant has the option to use the new runoff reduction method that will be in effect on July 1,2014. Noted. Concerning VDOT's comments, again from clarity,we have included the original comments and our responses in italicized print as follows: 1. As previously noted and acknowledged, storm sewer calculation, open channel calculation, storm sewer profiles, and pavement design calculations need to be provided for review. Approval of the preliminary plat will by no means be an approval for road and storm sewer/drainage channel design. Noted. The grading shown on the Preliminary Plat was developed as final grading. The final computations are in progress and will be provided with the final plans. 2. As vehicles currently park along similar streets elsewhere within the surrounding neighborhood,we anticipate vehicles to park along the streets shown on this preliminary plat. As such we recommend the typical sections to be designed accordingly. Both Belluno and Brunello road sections have been revised to 29 f/f urban as requested by County Engineering and Planning to accommodate parking along the street. 3. The intersection sight distance is shown to be 200'. The required intersection sight distance for these roads based on a speed limit of 25 mph is actually 280'. PLANNING 4 CIVIL ENGINEERING 4 LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P.Perez August 20, 2014 w. Page 5 of 5 We checked the intersectional sight distance lines for both Belluno Lane and Brunello Court using 280'. Horizontally, both of these roads tie favorably to Via Florence and Fontana Drive, respectively on the outside of a horizontal curve. The sight line looking north on Fontana Drive requires a site easement along the SWM Pond Open Space and has been added to the plat. Vertically, sight distance is satisfactory in both directions for Belluno and Brunello intersections. The sight distance profiles will be provided with final plans. 4. I am not sure that I agree that the second storm line is necessary, however, if it is to be installed,this second storm sewer should be located entirely outside of the dedicated right-of-way. The second storm line was provided at the request of County engineering. From our August 1 meeting with Troy, we checked to insure that the pipe does not go into the street right-of-way, except where needed to tie into a street inlet. The same holds true for the storm line and inlet locations as they related to the Albemarle County Service Authority sewer easement.All parallel lines are outside the right-of-way. We trust that we have addressed the comments satisfactorily. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, L Steven L.L. Driver,PE, LS PLANNING.4 CIVIL ENGINEERING 4 LAND SURVEYING WWW.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher Perez From: Amelia McCulley Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 1:40 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Elaine Echols; Christopher Perez Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Steve, I think we discussed that the most expeditious way to move forward with the plat is to follow the trail plan, particularly with key elements. I consider the interconnections to be key elements. I'd asked that both interconnections be maintained (Hyland Ridge and Ashcroft). I can approve it right now if you keep the interconnection between lots#3 and 4. If not, I'll need more time and have no guarantee we can do it administratively. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 12:12 PM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Elaine Echols; Christopher Perez Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, The link beside Lot 12 provides connection to the heart of the Fontana trail system, i.e.the primary connection. A link between Lots 3 and 4 to the trail in Ashcroft, a secondary(redundant) connection,would connect to an external trial that shirts the perimeter of Fontana. This is the long way around and would not be used by many, if any, thus would not achieve a public need that is already provided by the primary connection. Also,the existing trail the skirts Fontana,on Ashcroft property, already provides interconnectivity with Ashcroft,thus again, a secondary link would be redundant. Since there is already both a planned primary connection to the internal Fontana trail system and already an interconnection with Ashcroft and Hyland Ridge,this link should be eliminated. It doesn't achieve anything that's not already accounted for. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 1 - . .- •' ,i,f,-,...1 t •., ....--.= '' T / Ls"------ -, ', . ,,,,„,.,,,, , ..r.....,..„...... . ... .... ..),,-- ,,-- _„. . ..,. . , . .. , „,.. , „1„. „.., .___, .. •Igisma Aii■ ' 1.? ...' -. i Vi.' Vilt 'S• ' 4 W.-all '' I ';-.2- ■-. A _--' ----- 44 -1' -1.1,,,'.. ;oz. 1 ".-` „... • .,,A.,..\,, : .4 , ...,_., . I 4.7. . ''VB fli 'le ■I ' ' -'''. It% firl4C. 1.M:! lirt '' 1 ,, \ c,...oev - V. -- : q- ... ---- • •,.$' - , I . s i ' ',,acl,„ III ' vl if \L, AI s\ 0 ...4 I , ‘,.,. A, ..., '. 1. 40:.1 \ ,,‘ -,,,,- , „:\ .-4 '$) , •--, ' ' \ ''r••''..'./•'' .....\•ket,,. ' l''''‘,..V, \\41. i ' ''''''';::':",,.-6,':•,,,-----,:, ‘:\\\.1,‘” __ , 0_ .f.H,. ,\,it...,w i ,-,,,,,i t, : cur) ,,•i 1 d---r-TI,.Li' '-. „ ,, ---) i ,:‘,‘-.01t .' I -5 .i, A' !1_,_1_:I , .A :- , _ CD " I'1---\,■ '• ,' ' ,`--— ,, ...4.- -- - ,..... .-.- • I A-9.1, / ' / ,c,N; .. err::-,,.:; 04(—), ; /r, , . r,A,:i •,,, , „., =......■.„- Zil . ::,..14 ''' '''''''' ' ' ''''•A,.0.a:,,•d,' ...., (1) ‘• 4r), .''• .,\■.,,,, \'., ' kg • ''.,'''- 1 s 4 \ ' '-'- ''‘.,`• 3 - '•' ?.,)-1 , --fi,11_1 \ 1 CD hd tij , i ss,s 14.....mi 0 —• < 0 0 -2. CD C 1..■ I '- /-•,I. -AO- - --i ,5-, 0— r"") tis ;-• , , ,,'''..• -, ' ,-`*./ - - "I Cl) . i•d : ,---irk,: , •,:-.t. ..:: 4,,,,,, ovi, "1 ---,- ik-',91.0: 2 n ci, td = - - ,--ie.; '--. j -. .- • ,..r .••••41 I 21 I k..•.‘ a,• t-4 X tri tri 4- 0 11 oylit,....,1.#*,,. -• ,,,,:- --AA (1)—• 8. VI 0 ,- sr .1 .., fp Its, • , 5,, ,,,,./.":" , ..' 1."1" Z X rD (D ,,, -.0-7/ f ,, 24-40r.‘,• X —0,—;-....-.-• ----- sl' - ..,-- — ..--• ::-A-' . I —• ‘'\:\.. ''-, f: II li '- - D (/)• Christopher Perez __-- From: cAmelia McCulley Sent: tttesda 12, 2014 4:30 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Elaine Echols; Christopher Perez; Amelia McCulley Subject: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Attachments: Trail_Modification.pptx Steve, Steve, Please see the attached powerpoint to illustrate the administrative modification we're willing to do. I'll summarize it with the following: 1. Bellun ane—urban section with sidewalks on one or both sides of the road . I have not agreed to removing the connection to the existing Fontana trail that adjoins Ashcroft (between lots#3 and 4). You call it "redundant." How is it redundant and why should it be eliminated? /b. Please label either trail or sidewalk along lot 11 frontage on Via Florence Road. This connection must remain. XTrail segment along rear of lots#104, 105 and 106 as well as segment along eastern side of lot#104 adjacent to lots#10 and 11—agree they have been eliminated by prior action. OK 3. Brunello Court—urban section with sidewalks on one or both sides of the road a. Trail segment from cul-de-sac between lots#27 and 28 that extends through the middle of lots 13 and 12 and segment between lot#12 and 106—was eliminated by prior action and agree it's physically impractical and not necessary since the other trail segment to lot#106 is eliminated. I'll also note that you mentioned something about retaining walls and grading issues on some of the lots. Please keep the overlot grading proffer in mind for this. i "Nowt 1■01 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 2:59 PM To: Amelia McCulley Subject: FW: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, Hope you're doing okay. We are about a day from being able to resubmit the Preliminary Plat and need an administrative finding from the County concerning the pathway related to Brunello Court.To our knowledge,only that remains the outstanding. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver@terraengineering.net] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 4:21 PM To: 'Amelia McCulley' Subject: FW: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, Here's an updated exhibit for clarity. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 2 Nor -owe From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 3:13 PM To: 'Amelia McCulley' Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, Okay we'll add to the last exhibit what we described in our recent email and send to you.We are working on that now. In the mean time-we've attached a copy of the last exhibit for reference. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AM000LLE@albemarle.orq] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 2:57 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Steve, As I mentioned in my email on July 18th, I only reviewed the trail revision for Belluno Lane. I asked that you provide a trail plan for Brunello Court that is consistent with the rezoning plan. I haven't seen a revised trail plan to respond to and had no idea you were waiting for me on anything. I'm happy to consider any requested administrative modifications, but need to see where either sidewalks or trails will tie together. For any changes you are proposing to the rezoning trail plan, your description of those changes will be helpful. Are you proposing to follow the rezoning plan except for a path between the middle of lots 12 & 13? From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver@terraengineering.net] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 12:56 PM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, Good morning. We need your help so that we can finish the revisions and re-submit the Fontana 4C Preliminary Plat. This is to address the trails in the Brunello Court area. We need to know if you can favorably consider and administrative finding that the cross-country path that would cut across the middle of Lots 12 and 13 not be necessary. Please consider the following in your review: 3 Nome 1) Initially, Brunello Court was proposed with one sidewalk. Later it was changed to have a sidewalk on both sides and around the cul-de-sac to match the Fontana Drive road that Hyland Ridge built. Now engineering wants the road to be widened from 24'face-to-face to 29'face-to-face so that people can park along the road.Although not desired by the applicant, he is willing to make that change to allow on-street parking. 2) Some time ago the County decided to remove the future pedestrian path 4C link that was located build the lots on Fontana Court. It was this link that would tie to 4C at Brunello Court.There is no longer anything to connect to. 3) The new pedestrian path standards will not work behind the existing developed lots 104-106, since their isn't adequate space to build a path.The new standard is 10'wide with 5' path.There is only a 5' strip recorded. As such, any pathway from Brunello Court cul-de-sac would not be able to connect to an existing pathway head. (FYI -This path link will require many steps,steep grades and much fill, while not meeting a public need.) Because the Brunello Court sidewalks provide interconnectivity with Hyland Ridge and recognizing that no interconnection to existing Fontana paths is possible,we respectfully request an administrative finding that we are in general accord without that section.An "island" path-link would serve no public purpose. We hope this is helpful. We wish to re-submit the revised Preliminary Plat the first of next week. Many plan changes have been made.They include overall re-grading, adding retaining walls to create more space behind homes and to provide flow diversion swales, modification of the road's vertical curves, widening the Brunello urban road section 5', providing an urban road section on Belluno Lane and adding pathways to the Belluno Lane area. These revisions represent wholesale changes to the plans(basically a complete redesign), mostly at the request of County Engineering. So, as you can see,this has required much time to complete, and we are anxious to resubmit for Preliminary Plat(for general grading approval). Amelia- I know you're very busy- but can you please provide a response soon so that we can get the Preliminary Plat back in? Respectfully, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AMCCULLEalbemarle.orq] Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:50 AM To: Steve Driver Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshlemar aterraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane You are correct, my references are to Belluno Lane. Any trails shown on the rezoning plan for Brunello Court need to be shown. If you aren't showing any segment of a trail because sidewalks will be provided, we can 4 consider an administrative finding of general accord as we did for Belluno Lane. I haven't had time to review the rezoning plan to know where trails are shown on that road. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 10:10 AM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, Thank you for the response. Based on our interpretation from below, it appears you meant to say Belluno Lane in the beginning of sentence two. See RED correction below.Thus,for Section 2, Belluno Lane,we interpret your comments to mean provide the trails/sidewalks where shown in red on the Trails Exhibit dated 7-16-14. Due to your apparent typo, please confirm. Yesterday,we completed the re-engineering of the lot grading behind the houses for all lots along Brunello Court to add 'retaining walls'and a 'substantial berm')at the request of County engineering(county comments 17a, 17b and 17e). Therefore we need to know if any other trails are necessary in Sections 1 and 3 as this would affect the grading. Please let us know ASAP today so that we can begin the CAD work to incorporate these changes into the plans. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AMCCULLEalbemarle.orq] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 8:43 AM To: Steve Driver Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman@terraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Amelia McCulley Subject: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Steve, I was able to speak with Elaine prior to her leaving for vacation and have a response to your proposal. We only reviewed Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Belluno Lane, so this does not address trails on Brunello Court. Provided that you label the section as a proposed trail between the corner lot on Via Florence, we can approve what you propose. You are maintaining the two interconnections (Hyland Ridge and existing Fontana trails). The sidewalk for the new urban section road will satisfy the need for trails along the road. The result is in general accord with the rezoning plan for trails as well as the proffers. 5 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:05 PM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshlemanOterraengineering.net Subject: [BULK] FW: Fontana 4C Amelia, The purpose of our discussion today,was to obtain clarification on what trails are necessary so that we can obtain prel plat approval. Bill Fritz in our meeting on July 10, 2014 asked us to contact you when asked how a change to an urban road would affect the trails. We've received some disparity in the past on what paths are considered in general accord with the rezoning.Some of the paths require extensive grading and many steps, but yet accomplish little. So we need to know what the important components are to satisfy the rezoning intent so that we can obtain plan approval. Attached is the sketch based on our discussion at 1pm today. Please review. It's intended for your use and discussion only and is not intended to depict our interpretation of requirements or non-requirements. If Belluno Lane is urban then there would be sidewalks.We've shown in red what seem to be essential paths to follow the intent of the rezoning.The blue dashed lines are locations we had on the prel plat at one time but were removed based on County staff review(apparently considered non-essential)as they would be difficult to build or not useful or not further the intent of the rezoning. The path crossing on Via Florence at lots 89 and 90 provides the connection to the main Fontana Path System and provides pedestrian access to all of the Fontana path system.The secondary access at Ashcroft is redundant. Please let us know what paths are needed to be included on the current Prel plat to obtain plat approval. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft,VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AM000LLE(a albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 12:04 PM To: Steve Driver Subject: RE: Fontana 4C I will call around 1. Elimination of the trails, even with an urban section, requires an amendment to the zoning. 6 %.r From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver@terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:07 AM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; Christopher Perez Subject: Fontana 4C Amelia, Checking in. We haven't heard from you. I'm available today until about 2:30. Our production work is on hold until we can get some answers. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 7 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 10:46 AM To: Christopher Perez; 'Steve Driver'; Troy Austin Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; 'aeshleman @terraengineering.net'; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks; David Benish; Wayne Cilimberg; Megan Yaniglos; Mark Graham; Esther Grace; Troy Austin Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Attachments: Subdivision_Plat_&_Checklist.pdf Steve, Per the meeting we had last week, I offer the following summary and responses which seem to be primarily related to Engineering requests/concerns: 1. Engineering question: As I understand it you plan to submit road plans for 4C, attached is an application to do so (titled: "Subdivision Plat and Checklist", see page 3). Public street fees are listed as $250. Please coordinate this application with Engineering as they are the lead reviewers for the road plans. 2. Engineering question: Cascadia Connector—during the meeting you agreed to move forward with the Cascadia Connection to the property line but requested the Cascadia design for the road so you can match it's design when you design the section in 4C. Glenn or Max, at the meeting Steve Driver requested Engineering pull the Cascadia portion of the Cascadia Connector Road plan so he can view it to incorporate it into his design because the slopes in this area need to be considered to assure the roads line up. Please coordinate this effort with Steve so he may review these plans. Thanks. 3. Planning question: For a resubmittal of the prelim plat we'll only need 7 copies of the plat for review. 4. Engineering question: With regard to the discussion about Michelle's comment#6. Per discussions with you, you're not planning on locating any on-street parking on this road, thus the reason it's 24' FC/FC. Per discussions with Engineering after the meeting they feel that parking should be provided for one side of the road, and as such the road should be 29' FC/FC, thus it is not wide enough to accommodate this. Please coordinate this effort with Engineering and VDOT. 5. General Note about Waiver Request: As discussed in the meeting the applicant does not currently plan on moving forward with the curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscape strip waiver request which was submitted to staff. Rather they plan to design the road as an urban road design. As such, staff plans to time out of this waiver and awaits further instructions from the applicant. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 10:23 AM To: 'Steve Driver'; Troy Austin Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks; David Benish; Wayne Cilimberg Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase 1 `r.r w.0? Steve, Per your request I have reserved Conference Room B on August 1st at 10:00am for your meeting. As it stands I believe the meeting is primarily between you(the applicant) and VDOT. The purpose of the meeting as I understand it is to discuss technical engineering issues dealing with VDOT landings, specifically concerning the landing grades. Thus I am unsure of my value to the engineering discussion but am willing to attend regardless. You originally requested this meeting with VDOT, Engineering and myself. However, at this point Glenn is not attending this meeting, as he explained his stance in our last meeting (see the July 16th email below): "As it stands, I have heard all the explanations already, and I don't see a reason why these roads should be treated in a special manner different from all the other roads reviewed in the county. For example, at the intersections, using a simple curve from the intersected cross-grade to the new road centerline grade is easy and straightforward, and this would address Michelle's comment. " Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverOterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 8:40 AM To: Troy Austin; Christopher Perez Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman@ terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Troy, Thanks for getting back. Chris—is there a place we can meet at the County? Please let us know. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Austin, Nathran. (VDOT) [mailto:Nathran.AustinCulvdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 7:38 AM To: Steve Driver; 'Christopher Perez' Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; aeshlemanterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Glenn Brooks' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, 2 I have a meeting from 10:00 to 11:00 marked on my calendar for Fontana 4C on Friday, 8/1. I'm not sure of the space availability at the County. Please let me know the location once it has been determined. Troy Austin, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Charlottesville Residency 701 VDOT Way Charlottesville,VA 22911 Phone: (434)422-9782 Fax: (434)984-1521 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 3:34 PM To: 'Christopher Perez'; Austin, Nathran. (VDOT) Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Glenn Brooks' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris and Troy, Please confirm our planned meeting time for this Friday at 10am. Chris—let 's meet in one of the conference rooms at the County Office Building. Please confirm that also. I have to be there to sign some plats. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:23 PM To: 'Glenn Brooks'; 'Christopher Perez' Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; 'aeshleman @terraengineering.net'; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Troy Austin' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Glenn, Thanks for getting back. Waiting till a Monday will further delay the project.Troy can't meet earlier,so we'll keep our meeting scheduled for Friday,August 1 at 10am with Troy and Chris. 3 Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Glenn Brooks [mailto:GBROOKSOalbemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:56 PM To: Steve Driver; Christopher Perez Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanOterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Troy Austin Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, If I am to attend, I would prefer to meet at a regularly scheduled Monday pre-app time. We can be assured everyone is available, and I am trying to prevent my calendar filling up with random meetings. As it stands, I have heard all the explanations already, and I don't see a reason why these roads should be treated in a special manner different from all the other roads reviewed in the county. For example,at the intersections, using a simple curve from the intersected cross-grade to the new road centerline grade is easy and straightforward, and this would address Michelle's comment. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverCtterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:47 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanOterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Troy Austin Subject: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris. Our office called Troy to set that up, being that he was not at the last meeting on July 10.That's the earliest he could do that due to his impending vacation and VDOT moving their office from Zions Crossroads to Charlottesville. Great-thank you. We have not yet heard from Glenn about whether that date will suit him, but in the interest of time, we need to hold the date. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 4 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez@ albemarle.orq] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:49 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman(aterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz Subject: RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, Does VDOT know you have a meeting tagged with them for 10am on August 1st?Nothing in your email correspondence or any of the other emails about this meeting shows that Troy has been CCed to this meeting request. Just want to bring that to your attention and assure you get that meeting on the books with VDOT too. I checked my calendar and I can attend this meeting. Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdrivert terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:43 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; wfritz(aalbemarle.orq; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanftterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris, Following our discussion this morning, I spoke with Mr. Nichols and he would like to request you to process the waivers during the Preliminary Plat stage as discussed with County staff in our meeting last Thursday, July 10, 2015. This will provide time to address the remaining comments. At the meeting, we understood you have what you need to do that. Our client's goal is to obtain the right to remove trees at the earliest possible date. We were surprised that County Staff didn't invite Troy Austin, VDOT, to the Thursday meeting as part of the comments/discussion were concerning VDOT landings. This morning, we spoke with Troy concerning the landing grades and requested a meeting with him for discussion. We think it appropriate to meet with him, Chris Perez and Glenn Brooks all at once if that is possible. The earliest Troy can meet is August 1. We would like to meet at 10am that day. Chris- if you and Glenn cannot meet at that time,then we would like to hold that date and meet with Troy anyway since time is of the essence here. Troy- please reserve a 10am meeting time for Friday,August 1. Chris and Glenn - Please confirm if you can meet then. Yes, I can meet then. 5 7 ``OYIMr Glenn —You were going to look at the engineering items discussed last Thursday since these items are largely judgment decisions and get back with us. At the meeting we provided our engineering judgment involved in the design and referenced our previous review of these same items that were addressed to Phil Custer's satisfaction. We need to move the grading forward post-haste. Amelia- I trust you had a good vacation —welcome back. When you finish with your zoning meeting this morning, please call me. We need to discuss some items so that we can move the project forward, expeditiously. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 6 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 10:23 AM To: 'Steve Driver'; Troy Austin Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks; David Benish; Wayne Cilimberg Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, Per your request I have reserved Conference Room B on August 1St at 10:00am for your meeting. As it stands I believe the meeting is primarily between you (the applicant) and VDOT. The purpose of the meeting as I understand it is to discuss technical engineering issues dealing with VDOT landings, specifically concerning the landing grades. Thus I am unsure of my value to the engineering discussion but am willing to attend regardless. You originally requested this meeting with VDOT, Engineering and myself. However, at this point Glenn is not attending this meeting, as he explained his stance in our last meeting (see the July 16th email below): "As it stands, I have heard all the explanations already, and I don't see a reason why these roads should be treated in a special manner different from all the other roads reviewed in the county. For example, at the intersections, using a simple curve from the intersected cross-grade to the new road centerline grade is easy and straightforward, and this would address Michelle's comment. " t'hri■topher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle.Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 8:40 AM To: Troy Austin; Christopher Perez Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Troy, Thanks for getting back. Chris—is there a place we can meet at the County? Please let us know. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 1 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Austin, Nathran. (VDOT) [mailto:Nathran.Austin @vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 7:38 AM To: Steve Driver; 'Christopher Perez' Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; aeshlemanterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Glenn Brooks' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, I have a meeting from 10:00 to 11:00 marked on my calendar for Fontana 4C on Friday, 8/1. I'm not sure of the space availability at the County. Please let me know the location once it has been determined. Troy Austin, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Charlottesville Residency 701 VDOT Way Charlottesville,VA 22911 Phone: (434)422-9782 Fax: (434)984-1521 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent:Tuesday, July 29, 2014 3:34 PM To: 'Christopher Perez'; Austin, Nathran. (VDOT) Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Glenn Brooks' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris and Troy, Please confirm our planned meeting time for this Friday at 10am. Chris—let's meet in one of the conference rooms at the County Office Building. Please confirm that also. I have to be there to sign some plats. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 2 • N,.. NNW' From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverCaterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:23 PM To: 'Glenn Brooks'; 'Christopher Perez' Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; 'aeshleman @terraengineering.net'; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Troy Austin' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Glenn, Thanks for getting back. Waiting till a Monday will further delay the project.Troy can't meet earlier,so we'll keep our meeting scheduled for Friday,August 1 at 10am with Troy and Chris. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Smarts Draft,VA 24477 PH: (434)244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Glenn Brooks [mailto:GBROOKS@albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:56 PM To: Steve Driver; Christopher Perez Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman@terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz;Troy Austin Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, If I am to attend, I would prefer to meet at a regularly scheduled Monday pre-app time. We can be assured everyone is available, and I am trying to prevent my calendar filling up with random meetings. As it stands, I have heard all the explanations already,and I don't see a reason why these roads should be treated in a special manner different from all the other roads reviewed in the county. For example,at the intersections, using a simple curve from the intersected cross-grade to the new road centerline grade is easy and straightforward, and this would address Michelle's comment. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverCaterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:47 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanC&terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz;Troy Austin Subject: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris. Our office called Troy to set that up, being that he was not at the last meeting on July 10.That's the earliest he could do that due to his impending vacation and VDOT moving their office from Zions Crossroads to Charlottesville. Great-thank you. We have not yet heard from Glenn about whether that date will suit him, but in the interest of time, we need to hold the date. 3 Nor Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft,VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez(aalbemarle.orq] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:49 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman(aterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz Subject: RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, Does VDOT know you have a meeting tagged with them for 10am on August 1St ?Nothing in your email correspondence or any of the other emails about this meeting shows that Troy has been CCed to this meeting request. Just want to bring that to your attention and assure you get that meeting on the books with VDOT too. I checked my calendar and I can attend this meeting. Christopher P. Perez;Senior Planner Department of Community Development(Count) of Albemarle.Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville.VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver(aterraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:43 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; wfritz(aalbemarle.org; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman(@terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris, Following our discussion this morning, I spoke with Mr. Nichols and he would like to request you to process the waivers during the Preliminary Plat stage as discussed with County staff in our meeting last Thursday, July 10, 2015.This will provide time to address the remaining comments. At the meeting, we understood you have what you need to do that. Our client's goal is to obtain the right to remove trees at the earliest possible date. 4 We were surprised that County Staff didn't invite Troy Austin, VDOT, to the Thursday meeting as part of the comments/discussion were concerning VDOT landings. This morning, we spoke with Troy concerning the _ landin: :rades al • re•uested a m- 'I ! A . i i'a for discus '• • We think it appropriate to meet with him, Chris Perez and Glenn Brooks all at once if that is possible. The earliest Troy can meet is August 1. We would like to meet at 10am that day. Chris- if you and Glenn cannot meet at that time,then we would like to hold that date and meet with Troy anyway since time is of the essence here. Troy- please reserve a 10am meeting time for Friday,August 1. Chris and Glenn - Please confirm if you can meet then. Yes, I can meet then. Glenn —You were going to look at the engineering items discussed last Thursday since these items are largely judgment decisions and get back with us. At the meeting we provided our engineering judgment involved in the design and referenced our previous review of these same items that were addressed to Phil Custer's satisfaction. We need to move the grading forward post-haste. Amelia- I trust you had a good vacation —welcome back. When you finish with your zoning meeting this morning, please call me. We need to discuss some items so that we can move the project forward, expeditiously. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 5 Christopher Perez From: Amelia McCulley Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 8:43 AM To: Steve Driver Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Amelia McCulley Subject: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Steve, I was able to speak with Elaine prior to her leaving for vacation and have a response to your proposal. We only reviewed Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane, so this does not address trails on Brunello Court. Provided that you label the section as a proposed trail between the corner lot on Via Florence, we can approve what you propose. You are maintaining the two interconnections (Hyland Ridge and existing Fontana trails). The sidewalk for the new urban section road will satisfy the need for trails along the road. The result is in general accord with the rezoning plan for trails as well as the proffers. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverCa terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:05 PM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman@iterraengineering.net Subject: [BULK] FW: Fontana 4C Amelia, The purpose of our discussion today,was to obtain clarification on what trails are necessary so that we can obtain prel plat approval. Bill Fritz in our meeting on July 10, 2014 asked us to contact you when asked how a change to an urban road would affect the trails. We've received some disparity in the past on what paths are considered in general accord with the rezoning.Some of the paths require extensive grading and many steps, but yet accomplish little. So we need to know what the important components are to satisfy the rezoning intent so that we can obtain plan approval. Attached is the sketch based on our discussion at 1pm today. Please review. It's intended for your use and discussion only and is not intended to depict our interpretation of requirements or non-requirements. If Belluno Lane is urban then there would be sidewalks. We've shown in red what seem to be essential paths to follow the intent of the rezoning.The blue dashed lines are locations we had on the prel plat at one time but were removed based on County staff review(apparently considered non-essential) as they would be difficult to build or not useful or not further the intent of the rezoning. The path crossing on Via Florence at lots 89 and 90 provides the connection to the main Fontana Path System and provides pedestrian access to all of the Fontana path system.The secondary access at Ashcroft is redundant. Please let us know what paths are needed to be included on the current Prel plat to obtain plat approval. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President 1 Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AM000LLEc albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 12:04 PM To: Steve Driver Subject: RE: Fontana 4C I will call around 1. Elimination of the trails, even with an urban section, requires an amendment to the zoning. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver(aterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:07 AM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; Christopher Perez Subject: Fontana 4C Amelia, Checking in. We haven't heard from you. I'm available today until about 2:30. Our production work is on hold until we can get some answers. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434)244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 2 w r.r Christopher Perez From: Steve Driver[sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 3:34 PM To: Christopher Perez; Troy Austin Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Vv` ..„0„, Chris and Troy, Please confirm our planned meeting time for thi : '� ; r � `� ;- Chris—let 's meet in one of the conference rooms at the County Office Building. Please nfirm that also. I have to be there to sign some plats. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:23 PM To: 'Glenn Brooks'; 'Christopher Perez' Cc: 'Max Greene'; 'Amelia McCulley'; 'aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; 'Bill Fritz'; 'Troy Austin' Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Glenn, Thanks for getting back. Waiting till a Monday will further delay the project.Troy can't meet earlier, so we'll keep our meeting scheduled for Friday,August 1 at 10am with Troy and Chris. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 1 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Glenn Brooks [mailto:GBROOKS(&albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:56 PM To: Steve Driver; Christopher Perez Cc: Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanc terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Troy Austin Subject: RE: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, If I am to attend, I would prefer to meet at a regularly scheduled Monday pre-app time. We can be assured everyone is available, and I am trying to prevent my calendar filling up with random meetings. As it stands, I have heard all the explanations already,and I don't see a reason why these roads should be treated in a special manner different from all the other roads reviewed in the county. For example, at the intersections, using a simple curve from the intersected cross-grade to the new road centerline grade is easy and straightforward, and this would address Michelle's comment. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver(aterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:47 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Troy Austin Subject: [BULK] RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris. Our office called Troy to set that up, being that he was not at the last meeting on July 10.That's the earliest he could do that due to his impending vacation and VDOT moving their office from Zions Crossroads to Charlottesville. Great-thank you.We have not yet heard from Glenn about whether that date will suit him, but in the interest of time, we need to hold the date. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291. C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez(aalbemarle.orq] Sent:Tuesday,July 15, 2014 5:49 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanOterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz Subject: RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase 2 r Steve, Does VDOT know you have a meeting tagged with them for l Oam on August I't? Nothing in your email correspondence or any of the other emails about this meeting shows that Troy has been CCed to this meeting request. Just want to bring that to your attention and assure you get that meeting on the books with VDOT too. I checked my calendar and I can attend this meeting. Christopher P.Perez;Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville.VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver(aterraengineering.net] Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:43 AM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; wfritz@aalbemarle.orq; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman(aterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris, Following our discussion this morning, I spoke with Mr. Nichols and he would like to request you to process the waivers during the Preliminary Plat stage as discussed with County staff in our meeting last Thursday, July 10, 2015.This will provide time to address the remaining comments. At the meeting, we understood you have what you need to do that. Our client's goal is to obtain the right to remove trees at the earliest possible date. We were surprised that County Staff didn't invite Troy Austin, VDOT, to the Thursday meeting as part of the comments/discussion were concerning VDOT landings. This morning, we spoke with Troy concerning the landing grades and requested a meeting with him for discussion. We think it appropriate to meet with him, Chris Perez and Glenn Brooks all at once if that is possible. The earliest Troy can meet is August 1. We would like to meet at 10am that day. Chris- if you and Glenn cannot meet at that time, then we would like to hold that date and meet with Troy anyway since time is of the essence here. Troy-please reserve a 10am meeting time for Friday, August 1. Chris and Glenn - Please confirm if you can meet then. Yes, I can meet then. Glenn —You were going to look at the engineering items discussed last Thursday since these items are largely judgment decisions and get back with us. At the meeting we provided our engineering judgment involved in the design and referenced our previous review of these same items that were addressed to Phil Custer's satisfaction. We need to move the grading forward post-haste. Amelia- I trust you had a good vacation —welcome back. When you finish with your zoning meeting this morning, please call me. We need to discuss some items so that we can move the project forward, expeditiously. 3 .Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434)244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 4 Christopher Perez From: Amelia McCulley Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:50 AM To: Steve Driver Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane You are correct, my references are to Belluno Lane. Any trails shown on the rezoning plan for Brunello Court need to be shown. If you aren't showing any segment of a trail because sidewalks will be provided, we can consider an administrative finding of general accord as we did for Belluno Lane. I haven't had time to review the rezoning plan to know where trails are shown on that road. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Friday,July 18, 2014 10:10 AM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Amelia, Thank you for the response. Based on our interpretation from below, it appears you meant to say Belluno Lane in the beginning of sentence two.See RED correction below.Thus,for Section 2, Belluno Lane, we interpret your comments to mean provide the trails/sidewalks where shown in red on the Trails Exhibit dated 7-16-14. Due to your apparent typo, please confirm. Yesterday,we completed the re-engineering of the lot grading behind the houses for all lots along Brunello Court to add 'retaining walls' and a 'substantial berm')at the request of County engineering(county comments 17a, 17b and 17e). Therefore we need to know if any other trails are necessary in Sections 1 and 3 as this would affect the grading. Please let us know ASAP today so that we can begin the CAD work to incorporate these changes into the plans. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft,VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AMCCULLEalbemarle.orq] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 8:43 AM To: Steve Driver 1 Now Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman(aterraengineering.net; Christopher Perez; Amelia McCulley Subject: Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Lane Steve, I was able to speak with Elaine prior to her leaving for vacation and have a response to your proposal. We only reviewed Fontana 4C trails on Brunello Belluno Lane, so this does not address trails on Brunello Court. Provided that you label the section as a proposed trail between the corner lot on Via Florence, we can approve what you propose. You are maintaining the two interconnections (Hyland Ridge and existing Fontana trails). The sidewalk for the new urban section road will satisfy the need for trails along the road. The result is in general accord with the rezoning plan for trails as well as the proffers. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver(aterraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 4:05 PM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill Fritz; 'Anthony Nichols'; aeshleman @terraengineering.net Subject: [BULK] FW: Fontana 4C Amelia, The purpose of our discussion today,was to obtain clarification on what trails are necessary so that we can obtain prel plat approval. Bill Fritz in our meeting on July 10, 2014 asked us to contact you when asked how a change to an urban road would affect the trails.We've received some disparity in the past on what paths are considered in general accord with the rezoning.Some of the paths require extensive grading and many steps, but yet accomplish little.So we need to know what the important components are to satisfy the rezoning intent so that we can obtain plan approval. Attached is the sketch based on our discussion at 1pm today. Please review. It's intended for your use and discussion only and is not intended to depict our interpretation of requirements or non-requirements. If Belluno Lane is urban then there would be sidewalks. We've shown in red what seem to be essential paths to follow the intent of the rezoning.The blue dashed lines are locations we had on the prel plat at one time but were removed based on County staff review(apparently considered non-essential) as they would be difficult to build or not useful or not further the intent of the rezoning. The path crossing on Via Florence at lots 89 and 90 provides the connection to the main Fontana Path System and provides pedestrian access to all of the Fontana path system.The secondary access at Ashcroft is redundant. Please let us know what paths are needed to be included on the current Prel plat to obtain plat approval. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 2 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AM000LLE@ albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 12:04 PM To: Steve Driver Subject: RE: Fontana 4C I will call around 1. Elimination of the trails, even with an urban section, requires an amendment to the zoning. From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverC&terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:07 AM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: 'Anthony Nichols'; Christopher Perez Subject: Fontana 4C Amelia, Checking in. We haven't heard from you. I'm available today until about 2:30. Our production work is on hold until we can get some answers. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 3 • Nye Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:34 PM To: 'Steve Driver' Cc: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshleman @terraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols'; Bill Fritz; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Steve, I have received your request to proceed the with the preliminary plat as discussed last weeks meeting this will constitute a resubmittal of the plat within the required time frame since the disapproval letter went out. I'll begin processing these waivers to include providing them to Engineering for consideration and developing a staff report for PC consideration. Thanks Christopher P. Perez j Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle.Virginia 401 Mclntire Road(Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 }JET To: Christopher Perez Cc: Glenn Brooks; wfritz @albemarle.orq; Max Greene; Amelia McCulley; aeshlemanterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: Fontana 4C- PLease process waivers with the Preliminary Subdivision Phase Chris, F'' ��' e�y��� 4'f`; ; ��'"�L,,u�.s i' .u- _ ,a e �t C of v, @ 4E fivokokorocess his will provide time to address the remaining comments. At the meeting, we understood you have what you need to do that. Our client's goal is to obtain the right to remove trees at the earliest possible date. We were surprised that County Staff didn't invite Troy Austin, VDOT, to the Thursday meeting as part of the comments/discussion were concerning VDOT landings. This morning, we spoke with Troy concerning the landing grades and requested a meeting with him for discussion. We think it appropriate to meet with him, Chris Perez and Glenn Brooks all at once if that is possible. The earliest Troy can meet is August 1. We would like to meet at 10am that day. Chris- if you and Glenn cannot meet at that time,then we would like to hold that date and meet with Troy anyway since time is of the essence here. Troy- please reserve a 10am meeting time for Friday, August 1. Chris and Glenn - Please confirm if you can meet then. 1 *so Nose Glenn —You were going to look at the engineering items discussed last Thursday since these items are largely judgment decisions and get back with us. At the meeting we provided our engineering judgment involved in the design and referenced our previous review of these same items that were addressed to Phil Custer's satisfaction. We need to move the grading forward post-haste. Amelia- I trust you had a good vacation —welcome back. When you finish with your zoning meeting this morning, please call me. We need to discuss some items so that we can move the project forward, expeditiously. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 2 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 8:48 AM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Michelle Roberge; Glenn Brooks; David Benish Subject: RE: Trails Mr. Nichols, See my responses to your email below in red. I received a letter dated June 19, 2005 from the planning dept. stating that certain conditions were not met before they were remedied as the traffic signal was not yet installed. On January 13, 2005 (it was either a Monday or a Friday), four months before that letter I witnessed the very first "green" light of the traffic signal light up. VDOT took that signal over on January 13, 2005. It is working well today - nine years after its installation. The subdivision - alone -paid for that light although VDOT specified that a signal would not be needed if only the subdivision's homeowners were to be using it by the time of full occupancy. However, on the day of acceptance - January 13, 2005 -there were 128 homeowners at the subdivision and more than 150 from another. That new subdivision did not contribute to any of its $193,000 cost. I want you to find out why. I am not aware of the situation you are speaking of or any of the correspondence you are referring to. Please either forward me the documents you have or provide information about what project the documents are referring to so that I may be able to find them. It is most likely that the Virginia Department of Transportation would be able to answer your question, as they are responsible for requiring the traffic signal. In deference to you, the person who drafted that letter was a seasoned 15+year employee. However, as you are both fairly new, I would suggest that you go to the subdivision and see the trails, the several sets of steps, all sets made out of 8-foot railroad ties, cut by me to 5-foot lenghts, one set having 26 steps, all the sets installed by me and the two bridges, both built by me. After you have done that, you may be inclined to conclude that these trails are not appropriate for the homeowners, two-thirds majority of whom are senior citizens. The Covenants signed by the HOA, Inc. specify that any new expense that the Association must pay for has to be approved by its members. The expense which increases the monthly dues by 10% or more must be approved by its two-thirds majority. It is clear that this issue has to go to the Board of Supervisors, or even a higher authority to have it overturn this "experiment" which has proven itself to be a disaster. Please calculate a reasonable amount for a new performance bond that may be in place in order for this last phase, now before you in its soon-to-be tenth year in the making. Note well that the trails is the only issue that cannot be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. I believe you are talking about the trails when saying"this issue has to go to the Board of Supervisors." If it is the trails you are discussing I agree completely with you. If you do not want to construct the trails you will need to submit a rezoning application for the Board of Supervisors to consider. Only they can the requirement that the trails be constructed be removed. We cannot calculate bond amounts until the preliminary plat is approved and the trail design has received final approval and a bond request form has been submitted and the appropriate fee submitted. The bond request form may be found here: http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/Community_Development/forms/bonds/Bo nd_Request_to_Establish a Bond.pdf I will be unaccompanied at the meeting on July 9. Just the three of us. Please specify the time. I must have the amount of the required bond at the meeting in order to be able to place it in order that the tree-cutting will commence immediately thereafter. I have no knowledge of any meeting scheduled with you on July 9. 1 tasd Michelle will not be in the office for an extended period and another engineer will be working on this project. If you submit new information on this project it will be assigned to an engineer. Tree cutting cannot occur until all of the following events occur: 1. Preliminary Plat Approval 2. Approval of Road Plans. 3. Approval of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans. 4. Posting of necessary bonds. 5. Issuance of Grading Permit Once all these events occur you will be able to cut trees but only within the area shown for road construction. You may not cut all the trees on the property until you have the final plat approved. I want to take this opportunity to remind you that you have until July 15th to resubmit the preliminary plat to address the reason for denial of Fontana 4C. If you do not resubmit by that day the plat shall be deemed to be disapproved and a new application and fee shall be required for submittal of the plat. You have until July 10 to appeal the denial to the Planning Commission. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nichols @ymail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 1:40 PM To: Christopher Perez; Michelle Roberge Subject: Trails I received a letter dated June 19, 2005 from the planning dept. stating that certain conditions were not met before they were remedied as the traffic signal was not yet installed. On January 13, 2005 (it was either a Monday or a Friday), four months before that letter I witnessed the very first "green" light of the traffic signal light up. VDOT took that signal over on January 13, 2005. It is working well today - nine years after its installation. The subdivision - alone - paid for that light although VDOT specified that a signal would not be needed if only the subdivision's homeowners were to be using it by the time of full occupancy. However, on the day of acceptance - January 13, 2005 - there were 128 homeowners at the subdivision and more than 150 from another. That new subdivision did not contribute to any of its $193,000 cost. want you to find out why. In deference to you, the person who drafted that letter was a seasoned 15+ year employee. However, as you are both fairly new, I would suggest that you go to the subdivision and see the trails, the several sets of steps, all sets made out of 8-foot railroad ties, cut by me to 5-foot lenghts, one set having 26 steps, all the sets installed by me and the two bridges, both built by me. After you have done that, you may be inclined to conclude that these trails are not appropriate for the homeowners, two-thirds 2 majority of whom are senior citizens. The Covenants signed by the HOA, Inc. specify that any new expense that the Association must pay for has to be approved by its members. The expense which increases the monthly dues by 10% or more must be approved by its two-thirds majority. It is clear that this issue has to go to the Board of Supervisors, or even a higher authority to have it overturn this "experiment" which has proven itself to be a disaster. Please calculate a reasonable amount for a new performance bond that may be in place in order for this last phase, now before you in its soon-to-be tenth year in the making. Note well that the trails is the only issue that cannot be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. I will be unaccompanied at the meeting on July 9. Just the three of us. Please specify the time. I must have the amount of the required bond at the meeting in order to be able to place it in order that the tree-cutting will commence immediately thereafter. 3 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:04 PM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Steve Driver; Greg Kamptner; Mark Graham; Glenn Brooks; David Benish Subject: RE: SUB2014-63 Fontana—Phase 4C—prelim plat Attachments: E2 sub Fontana- Phase 4C.PDF Mr. Nichols, Attached is the latest comment letter from Engineering. This letter is available on Countyview and discusses how to obtain an approved final grading plan. The final grading plan is the reason your plat was disapproved. If you have further questions on how to obtain a final grading plan approval please discuss this with the County Engineer. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nichols@ymail.com] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 3:00 PM To: Christopher Perez; Greg Kamptner; Mark Graham; Glenn Brooks Cc: Steve Driver Subject: Re: SUB2014-63 Fontana — Phase 4C— prelim plat Mr. Perez, I don't know if you have seen the terrain upon which the existing trails are located. They are not walking trails. They are the climbing trails. I have not seen in the last three years any one person entering, exiting or being on any of them. Yes, the deer use them. Three months ago there was a half-eaten one behind Lot 49. The Association - even though it was required - has not maintained any of them. I would like to hear your suggestion as to the most expeditious way of resolving this situation as any trails on the north-side require easements and the four homeowners at lots 101, 104, 105 and 106 will not provide them, nor would Pantops-Lakeridge be interested in providing one. Lots 12 and 13 would be dissected in the middle.There are sidewalks on both sides of Fontana Drive. It was suggested that, perhaps, Belluno Lane could be made urban, even though there is a specific recognition by your predecessor that Belluno Lane is completely surrounded by rural sections. Another request could be that you require a performance bond while this whole unforgettable affair could be forgotten. It is my intention to have an attorney present this matter to the Board of Supervisors and ask for a waiver. I would like to meet with you any time on Wednesday, July 9. I don't see any reason why a bond in the mean time cannot be the answer. 1 Mr. Perez, this trails issue has not allowed the subdivision to be completed. The County of Albemarle has lost $1,300,000 in property tax revenue because these 34 lots were pre-sold before August 22, 2005 when this preliminary plat was presented the first time 9 years ago. On Monday, June 30, 2014 9:19 AM, Christopher Perez <cperez @albemarle.org>wrote: Mr. Nichols, Staff has completed their review of SUB2014-63 Fontana — Phase 4C — prelim plat, attached is the action letter for the proposal. This letter will also be sent to you via hard copy mail, and is available in Countyview. If you have any questions about the letter please give me a call. Thanks Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 2 ..r Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 12:20 PM To: Anthony Nichols Cc: 'Steve Driver' Subject: SUB2014-63 Fontana—Phase 4C—prelim plat Attachments: SUB2014-63 Fontana- Phase 4C-Prelim Plat- Disapproval_6-30-14.pdf Mr.Nichols, Staff has completed their review of SUB2014-63 Fontana—Phase 4C—prelim plat, attached is the action letter for the proposal. This letter will also be sent to you via hard copy mail, and is available in Countyview. If you have any questions about the letter please give me a call. Thanks Christopher P.Perez(Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22402 434.296.5832 ext.3443 1 , "�' TERRA ENGINEERING Now' •.r+ AND 2374 STUARTS DRAFT HIGHWAY,STUARTS DRAFT,VA 24477 111$ )LAND SOLUTIONS, PC PH.(540)337-4591 FAX (540)337-5291 June 4,2014 Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Rd,North Wing Charlottesville,VA 22902 RE: Fontana,Phase 4C Preliminary Plat(SUB2014-63) Responses to comments dated May 22,2014 Dear Chris: Planning Comments 1. We've notified the owner to pay this fee. 2. Noted. 3. The owner is requesting an"exception"for Brunello Lane to be rural section. An application and fee are enclosed under separate cover. 4. The owner will also be working with staff and plans to submit an application to amend the proffer through a ZMA(proffer amendment)to eliminate all pedestrian trails in Phase 4C. We've been advised by the owner that the majority of the homeowners don't want the pathways or physically can't use them. 5. The variance request or"exception"is for Belluno Lane to be rural section to match Via Florence where there are no sidewalks. 6. The ownership information has been added to the easement labels. 7. Yes,the Open Space is planned to be transferred,fee simple,to the Fontana Owner's Association as were the previous Open Space areas on December 17,2013. A note was added to the Cover Sheet. 8. This is noted on the top left corner of sheet C2.0.0 per previous request by county staff The note was expanded for clarity. 9. The Cascadia Connector has been extended to connect to the right-of-way along Fontana Drive. The design of this road should be by the developer of the subdivision requiring it. Only the land is to be dedicated by the Fontana developer for its construction. 10. The references on the plans were changed from critical slopes to"managed slopes". There are no"preserved slopes." 11. The density has been revised. 12. The streets have been noted as"private" or"public"via note on Cover Sheet. 13. The ZMA2011-1 note has been added. 14. The TMP typo has been corrected. 15. The area of 4C includes Sections 1, 2 and 3,Lot A and the portion of Fontana Drive not yet taken into VDOT's secondary road system and has been confirmed to be about 17 Acres. Final platting will determine the exact acreage. 16. Note was added to the Cover Sheet. 17. A revision date has been added. 18. Note has been added to the Cover Sheet. 19. Noted. 20. Noted. 21. Noted. 22. Noted. PLANNING+CIVIL ENGINEERING+LAND SURVEYING W W W.TE RRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez June 4,2014 ',moo Page 2 of 3 Engineering Comments 1) Due to the tight grading conditions and unique gradient changes in the topography in Phase 4C,the grades shown were worked out with County and VDOT staff during the previous review.A sag curve is shown near the intersection for Brunello in Section 3 as the lead-in approach road grade is held at 5%. Immediate to the intersection,about 30' of stopping distance is provided at 2.5-3%grade plus another 10' at 3%to 4%. Due to the topographic design constraints in Section 3,the approach grade defers to the ASSHTO standards for some relief in intersection landing slope. Thus, approach grade,although greater than 2%, does not exceed 5% as recommended by AASHTO's intersection design for local roads and streets. The exception to the Appendix B 2% grade was used here as discussed previously as allowed by the AASHTO deferral standard for special cases. Generally,the road grades along Brunello are moderate and the traffic volume low. Also, due to the steep terrain in Section 2, it is not practical to apply a full sag curve near the intersection. The lead-in approach road grade is 10%into a sag curve combined with a spline grade. To provide a safer and more practical approach, as previously discussed with regulatory officials,was to mitigate this unique circumstance and provide a safer intersection by using a spline grade in lieu of a full sag curve to provide a 40' safe landing at a 0.27%grade,which exceeds AASHTO's 0.5%to 2%recommendation where snow and ice(10% grade)can create poor driving conditions. The spline grade is a more practical option at this intersection on account of the needed 10%road grade and to reduce excessive cut at the cul-de-sac that would produce unreasonable grading conditions for the lots.The traffic volume is even lower for this cul-de-sac. Due to the topographic constraints with both of these road designs,the ASSHTO standards were applied at the intersections in lieu of the ordinary Appendix B standards. We understand that this request shall be submitted to VDOT's Resident Engineer or designee for review and that the Resident Engineer or designee,through consultation with appropriate divisions,will determine if the request will be approved for a VDOT maintained street. These intersectional design variables to Appendix B standards are what were discussed with regulatory personnel during the initial design phase before the lot grading was finalized. 2) A note has been added to the Cover Sheet. 3) Due to past problems with pathways in Fontana,the owner is requesting relief from additional pathway construction in 4C. 4) See comment 3)response. 5) See comment 3)response. 6) A No Parking note was on Sheet C5.0.0 and has been moved to Sheet C4.0.1.Another No Parking note was added to Sheet C4.1.1 for Belluno Lane. 7) Previously, it was agreed by County staff that Belluno Lane could be rural section since it tied into a rural section road, namely Via Florence.Now an"exception"will be requested to allow it to be constructed as a rural section road. The typical section appears to meet the minimum VDOT requirements. One additional foot of paving was added along the shoulder on each side to accommodate fire and rescue emergency situations, based on previous review comments as the more stringent requirement. 8) A second connection to Fontana waterlines was provided. The first was from the RWSA waterline along the powerline near the Day Care Center,the second from a waterline in the existing Ashcroft subdivision. A pressure reducing station was provided along Via Florence for the second high pressure connection. There should be adequate fire flow with the two connections. A flow test can be requested if needed. 9) No driveways are sloped more than 10%. 10) Noted. 11) The Cascadia Connector right-of-way has been extended to connect to the Fontana Drive right-of-way. 12) The standard VDOT driveway aprons have been labeled and the detail added. 13) All references to critical slopes have been revised to"managed slopes"per definition in the County Ordinance.Also,the toe-of-slopes were modified slightly below Brunello Court and behind lots 5 and 6 on Belluno Lane to meet the new steep slopes overlay district design standards of Sec 30.7.5. 14) The stormwater management easement label has been clarified to represent the Open Space area for each SWM area. The access road to each SWM Basin is contained within the SWM easement. 15) The tree conflicts have been corrected. 16) A note was added for clarity. PLANNING*CIVIL ENGINEERING+LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET Christopher P. Perez June 4,2014 Nese '■'` Page 3 of 3 17)a. This was taken into account with the grading. Slopes that need to be steeper than 3:1 are shown on the Landscape Plans as"LM"as listed in the Landscape Schedule on Sheet C5.2.0. b. These swales and yard inlets were added behind these houses at the request of and to the satisfaction of County engineer Phil Custer. The"inlet for every 3 lots"policy was confirmed to have been met by County engineer,Phil Custer. Retaining walls are not proposed anywhere they can be avoided as they are expensive to build and present a hazard for children playing on them and falling.Aside from building many private retaining walls,backyard space is going to be minimal on this mountainous terrain.Not all things can be achieved on these small lots and back yards are one of them. Buyers who want more flat backyard space can buy a house on less steep terrain. c. Noted. d. The low point elevation has been identified and labeled on Sheet C4.0.1. e. This area was designed such that all of the roof top areas on lots 29 through 34 are piped to the storm drain collector pipe running near the top of slope.A note was added at the bottom of Sheet C4.0.0. The minimal runoff from the steep slope area is expected to produce less net post-development runoff to Hyland Ridge than pre- development when combined with basin capture. The WPO plan submission will include detailed computations. f. No grading is shown to extend beyond the property line. g. Partly both. See attached drainage area map.Note that the existing drainage divide will be shifted northward to compensate for the reduced post-developed area that will continue to flow toward Hyland Ridge. These lots were regraded to the current layout per previous County staff's recommendations. VDOT Comments 1. Noted.To be provided with the WPO and E+SC Plans. 2. See note 1 response. 3. See note 1 response. 4. No on-street parking is proposed. See note on Sheet C5.0.0 which has been moved to sheet C4.0.1. A similar note has been added to Sheet C4.1.1 for Belluno Lane. 5. Intersectional site lines have been added at each intersection. 6. The second storm line is a result of design dialogue with County engineer Phil Custer for private storm water collection. Phil wanted to minimize lot storm water running across the sidewalks. The second storm sewer only follows parallel until there is a connection inlet or manhole to tie into the public street storm drain system. 7. The tree conflicts have been corrected. 8. CD-1's have been added to the profile. 9. The manhole and pipe were removed from the ditch line. Final construction details will be included with the WPO plans. E911,ACSA,Building Inspections No objections Fire and Rescue No comments received Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Steven L. Driver,PE,LS XC: A.M.Nichols PLANNING+CIVIL ENGINEERING*LAND SURVEYING W W W.TERRAENGINEERING.NET (-5 , , ,,,,,„,,,, , i -,---,, ...., i / i / / / , ,,, i / ,/' ,c 4.4/ / ,, / . / , -, / ,A..„ ,,,,c/-• , , , , / ( ," , „/,- ,/ ,/ 1 / ,,/,/ / 0 , ( / ,-,.. N.,-...:,, -„ , 1 i \\., ,,...--; r, i 1 i ---:. 7 , N.,/N , 1 ,-1,, 1 , .. ,N. k=1 ,... A--fli ,/ / 7/".„ ,-5--ii ii-1-- 1 , i ;N., 1 '--, ,■,:s,' -• \ \ -(-----7L-1/2 // , ' i 2 1 , \ ; 1 , - : .- --. .,, ) , \ ‘, , ,- s ,, • ,, ,.,„; ,, / , ,.f,,__ ___ ,... , \ ,Ac I \ / c , i I / ,,• , N., , \\„is \ , ; • ,' w I 1 i / , c I 1 filitlic ON 116. \ / I ,1 I 1 1 / / 0 I I I I 141.,11%,_\ , •<",, ) •\‘ , ',,\\\N\g \\ \ _ .-- I 2 \ \ ' \ ', -\ ,,,,. < (jj k i j I .1 ! 1,A \ • 1411k• 'N'' ''' .N i \\\‘‘\ \'‘‘, 24 \ \ \‘ \ \ V\ \'''■ `---- \ \, \ \ \■ \ .\ 1 \\ a0 , ! , .,,,,gok . 44,,,\,,i , . , ..a , .. •\.›..,..,) 1'.,‘„,,,,:\\'‘, '„ \,,,\ i \ \ \ '\Willivadi 1<\1.1111417 I I 2, ' '''•:'\'' ,2,\'‘‘'•:\‘\\ \1' \ \ \ • I y ,s, •j.., '\ ,s.' ) 1 \ • 's. \ \1 i• i / I 5)\\ \,' .4/,n,,,,11.11.""4411kNei. ' ' 1 i • -,,,,,NN i ) 8 \ ' 8 4 1 413fflogob-444,Nt V , 1-- ,,' - is. ,,,,i -,:, -.A. , \ 1 t\\,\\ . 1 \,c-- ti '' OfitiNv■S .' \ ',:,' ,,\., mop/ , i .::.::1,.:-,:::.: ._:?.:::::_:.•:- I .4 I - I " Igi 1 v It )0. \ \ \ ou.s::.:±,....„1.:...1.::..::.:.1. ...:,....,.,..41 ,., • , 1 frWsw11 s■. I. i;1166.- si'l , • '\ °'-‘ \ \ 1 A■ , : ,..,4; -:.:?::::,L,#- iii.. , . : voi10,,oci:1 ' ,, , i.N, i , 1 \ ---,,- , ', \ \ \-- , \ it , , \ \ , ., „ , A , • \ iill k■ 114 \\\ Itilli. -.1. -T. _._, , 4 . 9.1 \\,',.\'\‘\. i\\ A \\4 ■ \, 1 ( 1 kt-.3„14- iowi Jo a, i, 1 ,'_._ 1 +, ■ i p,,,, ■to , - -- ,, 1 \ , ‘ 000,7,/- - --7, 1 r . \\ \\. It _..Ze- 1 / , \ ,' // \ •\\ ' 6\ .ltioZNIWI•10101W1m.741i /'- i / ' \ \ , I I \I Ak, 2 fiVrTlit*I1,11.111r-- I -/ * '1 I M 1 . , , 1 1 \ ,, ,, A 11, • oti,V1 . ..;-'..,,/,':.!.•., / / 1 - /7j, 4--/, , / / / / , 1\ ' \ , '1 ' "A . ■'\\1,'- ,110 \ \ Y `-cAlirlfii■'' A / i''' / / / // A /i , , ,, ,, \ , 1 ,, li i 1 1 , ,I , „rig.., _ ...-- 11,x4ii‘ i ,/ : / • „\,, ,,\ , \ 11 , a1 , , ..a■iiii 74 1 . ,. :. , - Al.3 = ■,\ \ \ \ \ ,, n.....1 , iits7 ..--- 111-\.-.4 .- qc) 0, 11114" 1 \ \ \ \■ \ \ \,‘,.1,1 II 1 \ 1.,.. . , IPA' - -‘. • '' /°n-4) i \ . , 1 ■ , , i 1-1 WI ' llr-- 1111 i.1 PI - 1 \ 1 1 Y \' . --'40 '...k - •''''-_,/i1., ,(-)i I --/ •00.--/ i cLiEzi ,,i , il i i 1 \ ' 401$01t7 r iw 0 El 1 : 1 r/ 1 ) r-J !i„ ,, ,t4,,,a a 1 , •4410*. *,Al, (I,r , / FL..3/...;...f3.-„,--,-';41A 10-11 Hi W21 i ,, , '_ • \(\ - t, . _ _ b i ! , 1 T- , 1 . , ' Ill■- s.'\ ' ., , , ■ ., ! ,.\ _,, 14.41.#4,, .■ ::-.:------ -.---- , I 1 \ 1\ -\ \,,,.\-)C /\7- I 4 , ' , \ \ \ 18 ,.0,_ /,-----, 74, __- 4%41.r.wiii" -"--- ,-- '-**- ----.'-----: ■ 1 \ \ \ 1 ,-- _ ,,- viztv•i, „- , , z.„.--- --------011011 _ , . ■ 1\ 1 III 1 ' ° .*„ ! %--;7-: • \ iliVic,035312•.>V'- ce nr_ \ ■ \ \ \ \ \ \ ) ' i \ 1 1111 lir.L \N.N\ •'-'" •.,..' ' li 1 /' ' 6 ,,„ _ -6-- <--• --- Ery ( 11 , 1 ,■ , . \ \ ----S.7._■":-._::'5.*a /0/i///,/,. ‘,/,' /, ,--//•"\ 5 ...,"` ''; ' \ ■ . \ I I \ \ ' '' ''''--, , ,/ i''i / 1//,c4s4—•,/ / / ' - / . 1,7/ / '-\, --- --- A — / Z's / , • , j .co) , ' \ ■ ,?- I , A ,\, -:,--,-,,:---: --—---‹ 1 / / / c.,4\ \ , ,,u, , -..1.,, ,,,..-- , ,,.. .,.., y...i / / / , i / \, \\\\.'s,\\s ------ i 4 Arla , Noe Christopher Perez From: Anthony Nichols [anthony.nichols @ymail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:56 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Greg Kamptner; Mark Graham; Steve Driver Subject: Belluno Lane Rural Section and Walking Trails in Phase 4C Mr. Perez, Asa solution to tern•oraril resolve • - i •asse . • - • • - Plannin• Commission would release the Belluno Lane urban ba a -ection and until the trails requirement is removed in Phase 4C is to submit F'variance pplication and place performance bonds until the variance is approved. Ple- -e note t t nothing remains to be done on the—Prior frail phases as a deed was recorded o cemwber 17 conveying tittle to entire open space on all prior phases to the Association. You may refer to Mr. Kamptner regarding that deed.The Association does not want, nor will it maintain the trails, nor would the 2 prospective owners of Lots 12 and 13 in Section 2 because their respective lots would be dissected into two pieces as the trail would go right through in the middle of them The present homeowners residing at Lots 101, 104, 105 and 106 will not allow an easement at the their rear property lines because they desire to live in peace and not be intruded upon by strangers walking through their backyards. The same would apply to the remaining 32 homeowners that would be residing at these lots in Phase 4C. All in all, the trails are just too steep for a typical person that would use them. Steve Driver's office will deliver the completed preliminary plat tomorrow, as well as the Variance Application for both issues. Fontana will make arrangements to have the 2 performance bonds in place when the time is appropriate. Please advise. Thank you. Christopher Perez From: Steve Driver[sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:54 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Rebecca Ragsdale; 'Anthony Nichols' Subject: RE: [BULK] Fontana, 4C- Fees Attachments: 2014-06-03, Perez, Variance Draft.pdf Chris, Thanks for response. Here's a draft of a letter that we we're asked by Mr. Nichols to compose following his meeting w/ Greg Kamptner. He wants to submit an Application for Variance on the Urban section on Belluno and on the pathways. Please confirm the procedure. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez@aalbemarle.orq] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:36 PM To: sdriver(aterraengineering.net; 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Rebecca Ragsdale Subject: RE: [BULK] Fontana, 4C- Fees Steve, See my responses below in h tt . Christopher P.Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle.Virginia 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville.VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver(aterraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 11:53 AM To: 'Anthony Nichols' Cc: Christopher Perez Subject: [BULK] Fontana, 4C- Fees 1 Tony, NAtiof The fees we've identified that need to be paid are: $200 advertising for the Prel Plat Yes, a $200 advertising fee is required be the project went through Site Review Committee and abutting owners were/are notified of it. See Page 3, comment#1 of the May 22, 2014 comment letter. $500 for the Application for Variance What variance are we discussing?Variances are granted by BZA to change/modify requirements of a zoning district. I do not believe this project is coming up against any requirements of the R-4 zoning that it cannot comply with. A Variation is a request to change requirements of a rezoning but this mechanism is only for Planned Districts subject to Section 8, Fontana is a rezoning to R-4, thus a Variation does not apply to this proposal. Maybe you want to amend the proffers? I believe that is a $2,500 fee. If that's what you want to do, you need to discuss your request with staff and have a pre meeting with Zoning and Planning before making a submittal. I believe Rebecca Ragsdale of Zoning and I would be your primary contact for that. Let me know what exactly your wanting to do. Thanks $540 to resubmit the Prel Plat There is no fee to resubmit?The$540 fee which was listed in the comment letter is for the waivers for Curb and Gutter, sidewalks, and landscaping strips for Belluno lane, see page 1, comment#2 of the May 22, 2014 resubmital request letter. We're waiting on confirmation from Chris Perez. We have left two voice mail messages with him this morning to confirm fees and discuss Variance requests timetable. Steve, do you plan on resubmitting everything by June 6th? If not, it is advisable to request deferral on the project for a maximum time frame of 6 months so you can sort all this out. I'm deep into making a PowerPoint presentation for tonight's PC meeting,tomorrow would be a much better time to discuss the project with you. Please respond to the above questions, and I'll get into this tomorrow 1St thing. Thanks Steven L. Driver, PE, LS 2 Noe Christopher Perez From: Glenn Brooks Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 10:36 AM To: Christopher Perez; Mark Graham; Greg Kamptner Cc: Amelia McCulley; Michelle Roberge; Bill Fritz Subject: RE: Fontana - Phase 4C Preliminary Plat Attachments: Fontana_mediated_agreement_24July2013.pdf Attached is a complete copy of the mediated agreement. The mediation had nothing to do with the new phase or the current plan under review. I have indicated to Michelle in her review that it is completely a planning and zoning decision whether pedestrian accommodations are adequately provided in the new development phase. Engineering will see that any required items are provided on final plans. From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 9:09 AM To: Mark Graham; Glenn Brooks; Greg Kamptner Cc: Amelia McCulley; Michelle Roberge; Bill Fritz Subject: Fontana - Phase 4C Preliminary Plat All, Below are two emails from Anthony Nichols in which he is referencing historic information from a mediation between the County and the applicants legal team with regard to the trails in Fontana 4C. Please give it a quick read and let me know if you recall the end result of the mediation as he claims, or if you have a different recollection, or if you can't recall anything from back then(respond to specific items in red below the section you are responding to). Michelle and I will have to dive back into the denied plan, SUB2008-287 Prelim Fontana 4C, and see if there is any documentation of an agreement from this mediation in the file. I do not remember seeing any such documentation in the file, but we'll give it another look. Christopher P. Perez'Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road l Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nichols@ymail.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 7:49 PM To: Christopher Perez Cc: Greg Kamptner; Steve Driver Subject: Phase 4C Preliminary Plat Mr. Perez, It was clear from your email - as well as the one from Michelle Roberge - that there was a lack of historical data before you when your email was sent. In 1998 there was a requirement that 19,000 linear feet - 5 feet wide - of walking trails were to be placed before the tenth lot in Phase 4C would be sold. The objections by the subdivision and several individuals who were would-be buyers of homes were overruled. The two main objections were that the terrain was too steep (the altitude at Route 20 of 375 feet and 624 feet at Lot 5) with a grade of 12 or 13%, and the lack of privacy. Nevertheless, the construction started in early 2006 (the Phase 4C plat was 1 r..r filed August 22, 2005) and - before it was completed - several changes were required and were implemented. One of those was to install 26 railroad ties between Lots 63 and 64 as steps (at a grade of 40 to 50%). It was clear that older people were not able to use the steep trails and, as the average occupant age is over 50, voiced their objections as they knew the monthly dues would escalate. There was also the "interconnectivity" requirement. Their objections were set aside. Although required, the association did not maintain the trails. The County Engineer, threatening to call the subdivision bonds, ordered the maintenance. After 2 such orders costing $114,000, the subdivision called for mediation questioning the necessity of the remaining 29 items on the list. The mediation was an all-day meeting on July 24 resulting in removal of 18 items from the list. The cost of the remaining 11 items was $40,800. During the meeting Mark Graham was heard as saying that the requirement for the trails was an "experiment". That "experiment" alone - aside from the other 9-year expense - cost $740,000. A new ordinance was passed by the Board of Supervisors not requiring the walking trails at grades greater than 10%. The open space was conveyed to the association on December 17, 2013. After the Engineer's request for the subdivision to maintain the street signs, Mr. Kamptner absolved the subdivision from any further maintenance. The association continues to ignore the maintenance needs (the authorities were recently called to remove a half- eaten deer from the trail East of Lot 48) and rightly so as it does not wish to maintain them because the homeowners do not want them. The subdivision needs to be completed. I am asking that a tree-cutter may cut and remove all the trees in Phase 4C immediately. By the time his work is completed, the required changes in the preliminary plat should be approved and the infrastructure work commenced with the mass-grading and the e.& s.c. I am asking you to approve this minor request. Thank you very much. From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nicholsOymail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 5:01 PM To: Christopher Perez; Steve Driver Cc: Greg Kamptner Subject: Mr. Perez, The purpose of this email is to address the 5 comments which need to be responded to your note of last evening. 1. Steve's office is working on the changes required for the preliminary approval of the last phase, Phase 4C. His office will send them to you soon as they are completed. 2 2. An urban section was specifically not required as Belluno Lane is completely surrounded by Via Florence and the nearest urban section is on the north side of Fontana Drive, some 2,000 yards away. Except for that urban section, the rest of subdivision is of a rural nature. 3.and 4. These 2 items have to do with the walking trails. Please refer to Mr. Kamptner as he has specifically absolved the subdivision from any further requirements having to do with them.That is the also reason why there are no trails shown in Phase 4-C. There was never any requirement that there be any "interconnectivity" to Hyland Ridge. It was no longer mentioned. It must be specifically noted here that evidence was obtained at a mediation on July 24, 2013 that the walking trails was an "experiment" required by the County in 1998. That experiment failed. 5. Please note that the original proffer requirement was for an entrance from Cascadia to Fontana be a 50-foot right-of-way. It was amended to an emergency road by the Cascadia developer and apparently approved by the County. Although that 50-foot easement is still available - and the subdivision hereby provides it - there was no requirement that the Fontana subdivision provide anything but an easement. As the land belongs to to the subdivision, an appropriate payment must be made before an entry into the subdivision is granted. That is the law. After Steve Drivers's office has provided the minor changes to you, I appreciate your prompt approval of the preliminary plat in order that this subdivision may be completed after the original was filed on August 22, 2005. That 9-year delay is not thought of as reasonable. 3 - � / fie tent .012iiia- ill • a y y / 3 z.." 4?f? Or�coo/c J/// e- -/Q £ *'4 P451-rr er.,-Nf� kiL IJ A, A4. c1-w/ %' dJ)- a I- 7- 2,„/ / erebJ )4\-P /A`e) 276,1; e ei,736,5ei e r' e A e . h P foe e.->-, 0,1-J a-!-- Jed /7 01/ PP I c� ✓7zi'1 a hG'J-e C Ot 2,6- g£k, /8 2O // ( Pvi_ e‘ Pice-c- ) \ e w -Q a Gi ) C ecILupn Srecki4c jy`D'1J thg GU Se`I' 441\ D, ) G + j ej c ,Le Ule, A/ u w -111-Pge rze� r ° S f 71k9- ft,rke, C� C e.Q of 4A3[. f _ 5,1.'521 C e t ' v°n J -- -- o�. ..�/'" G � ✓� �C j/ f�'I E' C 1 �G��� . - St) f CP.N r\a W L `� c 4 46- .19 pa r e e �� e 1,0 a r eS-.3 Aitysce_fie, YlArki0 (jam eP1, /o›-e - G) f,A Gn f'r1►e e f‘..r f,ifIcA2 iro ID A) , P. r. �.. N.0` a a l t e j Act" pczytda-cel fj'lI r i f)7, �%� ply d c,.. b }1)e A 144 ( eo( SG.he�,� v C� 11,\_ G iiV Db4kin 2 i It)62. 1)1e1/),) Gr J r k'd/ 1 u U e 0 Cet r G 61n " Abei- )Q co yr J i`br,J ® f- 7/lie fPr • ( '), / e -gee\ f1 .)-7•-) 7c eJ. 13ro o i ay e Gt JA e4,4- core._ ,142 40 J- /(0 rrc- Gras./f e ?r,`.-ti a#id ",7 l SO ltd )iD• Ivia G C4 9 s7 l"? 6r oakj 0)1 Ao, )'Lpec_`h,) e i p- ). Drk,, ,brae k's cA etil 1) a y 1 nm j hdApLA ��--rte.. �-�l . 4 ; 3 s fed G�r- 4 :11Nik /1 pe JJ /she. j` yr c4.0( r h v\ . A e cal'-- f eat tU ar Ocvok gh c6 GA by„ , es l( 2L 1 c 'e 2 ) 4° `c f.t- , pace. r, �.a e Steil — I f/ Doke- if J'Al - 61E'SJ �t G�o6�� ,�:` /\ arc/ 1 j Ste) �'. 1 L /!t a l i frtir)-et 0 An okk i-ovyil v eziti 1-a> Meal d kJ -2_ 0 3 1. , rolled eof.dat 4 . Art& — -PY0111 AIG"' Sreci-"r 6, Alito, U -2.1 dePtaMtAte) • c . Chie-more, Boicite — Lot- I-Z J -1-0€ 4 si-eef slope- al- frail z. I4-011S lvg *el — (24,14,01 e/ &t cinder frd 4om reininnt›P. ffsl to handrail raytived) — P. oLitiA ° clear dzirtil ° 2 :1 5/.:11-e. ° Li wata. • ejp roe liruLd . skr N2r;c, 13 - 62-mitok, - tv1-&(1 pules-Fr:cut br; a Soft- OLS bri cd- - avlbouuc o44.4 of/met pei HDE ewirvicute.411' etiv1 rheidaez4 6:14,main/ 404 rip-pcp 14• _ ____________________ 9st&lt nsuAl 0-1" HWE_Fieda, with 1-1 51/30midifxs friNons of... ' -0 eti_S-1-;a51104-4 4-1.4e-41 ift shat'Ayr _______ Th 4' . 4' 4ciadef 10A1 • • • • `i .(co nfl and p--'l _- eJc 5}+' SI , 'o h bolt, vich +o creak¢, a. '-1 t • shovtlac r r 'o s o ewls1411 • ... ah.e.. iv1iINdred in 560u(d cr codc,0 {-1ox-) Z-1-ewt 0 Zs tutodl cross slope +b yulax;nrtwv+n oc- 5 per .4- r, (_— C (sIope--) of -h'a+l � �/ "►'� — � indt4d4-4 runs ' rorw cross ctrouvi above, t+ek14 4417- -b (joss olvai n OJ- T+e 4. dt 21 • — 60.4- 0.0. ,rial MM/ k vvas d ovI si.e, Was fad ma-a vi al mit41- sk10; aed 6ir s r d7K srvwo4;145 , awd se.Q K3f rnu d6 a 'ksr EAS rneek u� NDTE % AYt& oviJ i 4.W1 flW'vlh.QXS utS.P.1 (iorre,s pmci + f oco4ion1S • on • 41^1Z. .'1 + iviriec+iov4 lei- of q Dee ZoII GEE," filtd.4A.J krefo - --- ---- — • ,. ^_ "i 4.?♦ ,�;y •} e: '� 4'1+: I +F1�1(r ✓�� ' It I -• Fr{� ,q T', 0T;i E s 7.,. ,, ? L„4:1.. ,,kk} i(L y 7C "Y t ji�ig._), , ,t-... {�� 'Y-1+ �',t `•'Y. t3',:• s ,,`✓ t 1' q �� f f 7.17,. , 1 � � 14 t `"�.r z ' Qr / yk • t l ',.-t''.1...'-.1 4111:5;i:.,,,,r:--17 ',.t?,,V;,1_38(4,1-,11\\I 4)',/,..: ,i'fr."'' '.7 W,r,.... , .' :, ,...,,t;,- S• 41•,, ?, ee,• l4' i \f!.f1 J}} {�T1 +uC ice . t • i..) , '1 ' ' l�~ r - 1 'I pp 1 t 4 _' .� ,t ,/ its'., „it Q A 1 ,f7.... nt k s t 7 s , 1i C t _ b t 1 ie r+ }#.�L \' 4,y l t , i ,., y(r�,,.' .0\_, V. �> y ,'.,.,� , 'rti . 5.J,.,, , 1 F .h,r ti„ V�j � .pY J .l >A' 'Iv c Lo � f ' yl 4 of ; Y C ,'''.',:.,: ,4':', a .j•'ti: �.�, •'1!:'t .� '. ,.�..�,�:,rr ,6:41..."'..16;,`t �,�r` 1 r '., �F 1 j• :'-47 kt,31 NA E �k °� + -„, , l ,, =c a t ,i. t ItI ht,? 4y r • t ;r 7tr,1 N, '� 'y't” .e ,, > {�- } r• ,∎, 4c cy i,,y' '.'5-;.;. " °. `.it r ♦ I r,[/, r ff", 'f j +t' 1 r ,. 41,,1, 1 4 {„.., `�„ �.f'M-i- S✓ 1 - t r ,, 7 \'t• hit I#{ .1 y f�1 � l CI �" • i If F f< r ' 1 411•1+) s r ' E. i.! ,. y. i, ,.7 k4,',111,11,I 1, .iO -4;,-,, �•S t I ‘k...4.,' Y '', °` r 1¢•'° y� `iii, • V„V':�i 1 �S -. e -i_ ,V.! R to, V`k y17' 9 'r '41'1(3.,7:,( 4 s.•'f a ' Jr r5 '` b , _{,t�•? ,,. ,st+ e' i f ' .. ,1! �'1t i•,,1, t f � 1•y . ,' • a•f i lI4 }' 1r/ ..k i , 'i b`r`a 1 , . ,c t* S 1 F,1 .i N.t%,,--'7.,',-/ 1{ i tit"'`��}A V t I•%.%tti'Rr. - ( f�7__ �,',e f y,.-1 ytl; e ■ . + 1� ..,,",..„I',- R ,' I ,{E Mt, t3 y'�`I t1 \ 4,44.1',`f a 5 -3 l ff rf M1 k- t• '�l' t !' <b4•r ,\ r,' i ,, '. t• l 1 t` mot, `t� v ;,3 rt, 1' -, • f \ y > '1n'7 n �.I.,4 s t --- �t i '..� Z►+ f_' ,. .}lp'.; y _ +.4 p 4ti4 n t, _ Y _ '' .,,, ,Y. .•\ .-.1 ' �f+\J S lRu: � , s ;, ,,..,,,,P.-4"1,:'._i.,s ., r' w � .� , ,Y; '1 � � .."4-, 7i j' f,fr- ��. � %.,;,, - ! 1 t r` (1`a y ` 'r `�•,1 a'1 s�to ry �• wtS '-+�? ?� • iy 1 .yyw .�� 1 .,•. ry ! .-•..f"1 If t y Ifl•! 1 k> S.t ty • !rib.- ,, + C' ry' V iSyr•+.� `u, 1 '. t• C '' . . r''� � „\ r C� 0, l d€r-•rtii. 't: .1\ -'0.- C' a , 71.t' '`'•` V ""'• 1„....--. : '' tt ., ~ .' F.'. ', .-. -♦s,' n • 4 ;• s n y.� 2,F1�r M ' i 4.y tr ; .y , ••-' 0 app . •�i `b i, �l, y 1•§ � '' ,~� „2 F y,' •-, ,.;',,',,,'.1 :�ky��; �`Y(y1t i� � s1r1 '0 1 ' v ,,'4,.„I''^,,;...11.‘t,i 'r ti A 1,''2. .4 •' '„k-,:,,' ',A y . rya { t r,,''I . ,4 F`' i if t .Y '' e Ste'r'' •.w. qy.7 ,7s F d • ,) !. •, ,,1 .,�i 5 .rr '' y 4.} _" tlY� \ 3 f- A ` t-J,Ih < 5t^ ,*1,,A,,,,,..1'';1" �1 ;lii 1 C° "MR, leh < '.tP , .. Sr i �, of t fist-, ' , r } �, v "�..y, '‘`,.;•,,+-„.) j �+p"E�l'*c ,��'ts rYy�t >�ra*�4r�'y 's Y; 1 If�u�h 0-$.,r!�...,.ff 1� > . r ,„,;1C lot r T...",F• 111''E V N! ,k 4 px,3. ,1 fit, -, ` f`iJ, �! ^ 4• 1 i1'/ ti t ti . ,Y" 1d 1n 'C2k tI •iy tsY '-r. r. °„• ' t(S ,r ,,, t ` 1 t it „tt 1,'''t '•,.t-'` 3 f• Si In _ r ..�.. .' ey t'"' tL„ s,,. 1TL-Al. ;4°f:1.1., .i:i.:S,• ...'�.,. ' : —L,.. CO .i.kit t-^r. A c \(.1 a. 7i 417' , t J E ,u M (- �• J tit ,•:•, ti jt�• 1. j t . , • Lrr' .✓ Christopher Perez From: Mark Graham Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 2:35 PM To: Greg Kamptner;Anthony Nichols Cc: Elaine Echols; Christopher Perez; Wayne Cilimberg; Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Affordable Housing Tony, With respect to changing the proffer for affordable housing, Greg has already identified that modifying he affordable housing proffer would require a zoning map amendment(rezoning). If you wish to consider this option,the application has a mandatory pre-application meeting with staff to review the request and staff to advise you of issues that need to be addressed with the application. We have standing meeting times on Monday afternoon to discuss this. You or your engineer are welcome to schedule this meeting anytime by contacting any of us. The pre-application meeting should help you understand the County's expectations with this policy and help you understand what it will likely take for the Board to support your position. With respect to the preliminary subdivision plat under review, I note that the timeline for reviewing this plat indicates that reviewer comments are due on May 19`h. While I appreciate you believe this should be faster, staff needs comments from outside agencies such as VDOT and the ACSA to complete its review and we cannot expect those comments any quicker than this date. Additionally, I will note that the preliminary plat approval by itself does not allow you to grade this site. To grade this site,you must first obtain an erosion and sediment control permit which requires both an approved E&SC plan and a bond agreement before the permit will be issued. If you are desiring a grading permit soon after preliminary plat approval,you and your engineer should submit a complete application for an erosion and sediment control permit very soon. From: Greg Kamptner Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 8:57 AM To: Anthony Nichols Cc: Mark Graham Subject: RE: Affordable Housing Tony- An amendment to the affordable housing proffer would require a zoning map amendment approved by the Board of Supervisors. I am forwarding your email to Mark Graham, whose department can guide you through that process and respond to your concern about the processing of the Phase 4C final plat. Greg Kamptner Deputy County Attorney County of Albemarle gkamptner @albemarle.org From: Anthony Nichols [mailto:anthony.nichols(aymail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 11:48 AM To: Greg Kamptner Subject: Affordable Housing Greg, As we have briefly discustd this issue before, I would liko ask for a waiver from this requirement as the 17+ acres should have not been included not have excluded from the original plat in 1998 because the two conditions were imposed on those lots were not an issue, namely the Monticello viewshed and the lack of water pressure in these 17 acres. I would appreciate your advice as to the procedure. Also, I am concerned about the slow review of the plat of the final phase, Phase 4C that Steve Driver's office delivered to the Community Development on Monday, Apri 7. Most of the issues have been resolved over the past 2 years of the plat that was submitted more than 8 years ago and it is appropriate for that department to respond in a timely manner. As the trails are no longer an issue, I believe it is time for that department to approve the plat in order that the trees may be cut and the grading started. Thank you. 2 Christopher Perez From: Megan Yaniglos Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 2:49 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 9:21 AM To: David Benish; Megan Yaniglos; Alex Morrison; Bill Fritz Cc: Amelia McCulley; Glenn Brooks; 'Anthony Nichols'; Greg Kamptner; Mark Graham Subject: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Subject: Fontana, 4C Meeting Place: Albemarle County Office Building Meeting Date: March 31, 2014 Meeting Time: 2-3 pm Meeting minutes as follows: Four County people attended: 1. David Benish, Chief of Planning 2. Megan Yaniglos, Project Planner 3. Alex Morrison, Civil Engineer, ACSA 4. Bill Fritz, Manager of Special Projects (briefly) From Terra Engineering: 1. Steve Driver 2. Abe Evans The decision makers, Glenn Brooks, County Engineer, and Amelia McCulley, Zoning Administrator, were absent. We briefly discussed the history, explaining that the original intent was to include the Proffer 2 Final Grading on a "Preliminary Plat". This was accepted and reviewed by the County six (6)times. Previous County engineering review included all of the items listed in Proffer 2, but not formal WPO and E+SC plans as Proffer 8 prevented their submission (previous bonds had not been released). Although, preliminary stormwater 1 computations and water qualitIpm e'orksheets were requested, provided,?'C hewed and revised as requested, it wasn't until the last submission that the County issued a denial letter dated January 28, 2013. Up until then, the applicant and the County had been working towards Proffer 2 final grading approval and the preliminary plat application was simply the only standard mode of transportation for a non-standard submittal process. (Final grading plans don't usually precede a preliminary plat.) The plan name could have been different, but the County had no other mechanism (to our knowledge)to submit in the unorthodox fashion of a final grading plan preceding a preliminary plat. It is agreed that the method of plan submission driven by the Proffers and that required by the regular Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance requirements are two different procedures. And that the Proffers should govern. Megan asked if the final grading plan could be included with the preliminary plat for review and approval based solely on the conditions stated in Proffer 2. We stated we had no problem with that as this is what the applicant has been working towards thus far and is what the County has already reviewed. In a nut shell, David Benish seemed helpful. He said we raised a good point that the proffers do not state that a WPO and E+SC plan are required as part of the Proffer 2 Final Grading, but said the decision lies with Amelia. Megan composed the last letter of denial which was directed by Amelia's input. The basis of denial was that the County Engineer had not issued an approval of the final grading plan. It appears that the County disapproved a preliminary plat while the applicant was requesting first, review and approval of only Proffer 2 final grading(a component of the preliminary plat.) Preliminary plat approval could then follow. Here we have the chicken or the egg scenario. It was noted that the over-lot grading plan (Proffer 2) was included at time of rezoning processing due to the County's concerns over previous grading problems occurring between independent builders (due to a previous lack of a County requirement for an over-lot grading plan). For the sake of time, Terra's suggestion today was to resubmit the plan as is (with a name change to "Proffer 2 Final Grading Plan" in lieu of"Preliminary Plat" and to get that approved, not based on WPO or E+SC, but only on the Proffer 2 requirements, so that a preliminary plat can be approved (with conditions if needed)to move to final construction plans. With this approach, trees can be cut and a final plat can be submitted at the earliest possible date while the final plans are being processed for approval with the various regulatory agencies. We indicated that the WPO and E+SC plans are in progress, but will take some time to get to final approvals. If the current plans meet all items as specifically stated in Proffer 2, we would request an approval of the Proffer 2 grading only, as shown on the preliminary plat. If the Proffer 2 final grading needs to change for some reason, no problem, as there is a provision for this in Proffer 2, I and that the forthcoming construction plans are subject to further review by the various regulatory agencies. Bottom line: It would appear that the County is apparently trying to follow their Ordinance with regular submission procedures by interpreting the Proffer 2 in a way that is contrary to how it is written. The County's interpretation is that Proffer 2 intended to include both WPO and E+SC. The listed Proffer 2 requirements simply do not include WPO and E+SC and this proffer supersedes the regular County submission requirements. The 4C proffer makes the process unique and contrary to the norm. And therein lies the apparent source of confusion. It is clear that all of the review comments have been adequately addressed as referenced in the 2 County response letter to the atfrfricant dated January 17, 2013. The onl'ang-up appears to be that of processing procedure (namely the plan name) and interpretation of Proffer 2. Terra's recollection is that the intent of Proffer 2 was to ensure that an over-lot grading plan was devised in the initial stages of the design. That has been accomplished through the previous reviews by the County engineering and planning, ACSA and VDOT. WPO and E+SC are to follow with review and approval for construction, but what is lacking is approval of the Proffer 2 final grading all comments of which have been addressed, and preliminary plat acceptance. The applicant requests approval of the reviewed and revised grading plan in accordance with Proffer 2 ONLY. Immediately following that, the applicant requests an okay on the Preliminary Plat in accordance with the remaining proffers. Once the final construction plans, WPO and E+SC are completed and reviewed, then grading can commence. Two (2) new, but apparently minor, items surfaced: 1. The County has tweaked their critical slopes language- Bill Fritz didn't think that would impact the plan. 2. The ACSA has changed their water pressure distribution, and certain homes will require pressure reducer values to protect internal plumbing. Please let us know within three days if any corrections are needed. Please provide further clarifications on plan submission and processing procedures so that this project can move forward. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 3 Christopher Perez From: Megan Yaniglos Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 2:48 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 5:10 PM To: Megan Yaniglos; Mark Graham Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Amelia McCulley; anthony.nichols @ymail.com Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Megan, Thank you for the clarification. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Megan Yaniglos [mailto:myaniglos@albemarle.orq] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 4:57 PM To: Steve Driver; Mark Graham Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Amelia McCulley; anthony.nichols@ymail.com Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Steve: Looking at the application, yes, $1,150 is the amount. No, as I have stated previously, this is not a revision, but a new application. As such, you will need to submit the required number of plans stated on the application. Megan From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriver@terraengineering.net] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 4:48 PM To: Megan Yaniglos; Mark Graham 1 Cc: Greg Kamptner; David BenishSor nn Brooks; Amelia McCulley; anthony.nic s(&ymail.com Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Megan, Thanks for the added clarification. So for more that 20 lots the fee is$1,150. Is that the correct amount? The reason we're asking these questions is that the applicant has already paid a Preliminary Plat, Public Street and WPO Fee all as requested by County staff. I would ventured to say there are many other fees paid as well on 4C. And since this has been reviewed many times,the number of prints to submit is 8, for revision, in lieu of 16? Is that correct. We don't want to have another submission rejected again because 1. The fee is not correct or 2. The number of copies is not correct or 3. For any other reason (the applicant was quite surprised and taken back when a denial letter was issued last time.) We want to avoid any hang-ups.The applicant wants to finish the project. Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Megan Yaniglos [mailto:mvaniglos@albemarle.orq] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 4:29 PM To: Steve Driver; Mark Graham Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Amelia McCulley; anthony.nichols@ymail.com Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Steve: I do not understand where the confusion is concerning the fees. The application that was given to you in my last email clearly outlines the fees depending on how many lots you are proposing. The plat, once submitted, will be reviewed under the review schedule that was also provided in my last email. If you submit on April 7th, you will have comments on or before May 22nd. You will be submitting this as a preliminary plat. We will review the grading information under Proffer #2 during the review of the preliminary plat. You will need to provide the requirements of both the preliminary plat and Proffer#2. So, the title "preliminary plat" is correct. 2 Megan From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverOterraengineering.net] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 3:46 PM To: Megan Yaniglos; Mark Graham Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Amelia McCulley; anthony.nicholsCo�ymail.com Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Megan, Thank you for your response. Yes, we know what the Proffer says, it's on the plan. Engineering staff reviewed the Proffer 2 grading plan at least six times including two or more face-to-face meetings to address all comments. One would think, at the 11th hour,that no NEW comments would occur, particularly since we're on the eve of submitting the full-blown construction plans and the proffer allows for grading changes after Proffer grading and Prelim Plat approval. We would expect an expedient review. We've reviewed the fee sheet. Given that many fees have already been paid, how much are you asking for now? Please let us know. It's not clear to us as this requires some careful consideration by the County. Please let us know the amount needed today, so we can let the applicant know. Do you want the name of the plan left as is, "Preliminary Plat" or should it be titled something different? Please let us know that also. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Megan Yaniglos [mailto:myaniglos(aalbemarle.orq] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 2:58 PM To: Steve Driver; Mark Graham Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Amelia McCulley; anthony.nicholsC@ymail.com Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Steve: Amelia, with talking with Mark, Bill, and myself, has determined that you can submit a preliminary plat and "final grading plan", showing the information as required under Proffer#2. She has determined that a WPO and 3 E&S is not required. However, Noe proffer also allows the County Enginee'P"Eo require the plan to show "other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements of this proffer." He will determine this when the plat comes in for review. Since the previous plat was disapproved, you will need to submit a new application and fee. The plat will need to show the requirements under Proffer #2 along with the preliminary plat requirements. I have attached the application and checklist for your use. I have also attached the review schedule. The next submittal date is April 7th, this coming Monday. We will then review the plat, and the County Engineer (Glenn) will determine if the final grading plan meets the requirements stated in Proffer#2. Once he has approved the final grading plan, we can then approve the preliminary plat. Please let me know if you have further questions. I believe this email has outlined the steps needed to take in order to move forward. Thank you, Megan Megan Yaniglos, APA Senior Planner Community Development Department Planning Services ph: 434.296.5832 ext. 3004 From: Steve Driver [mailto:sdriverCa�terraengineering.net] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 1:59 PM To: Mark Graham Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Megan Yaniglos; Amelia McCulley Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Mark, Thank you. Amelia informed us yesterday evening that Glenn was out this week, but no out-of-office reply has been received from his email. We are still awaiting response to the last two emails. If it would be helpful, we can give you a complete list of everything County staff has asked for regarding the Proffer grading, all of which has been addressed. The records are in the files. It has now been two (2)weeks (March 20,2014) since we have requested direction and cooperation to move this project forward, and to date little to nothing has been received from the County. Delay continues. The applicant has already paid many fees associated with Phase 4C plan submissions. Thanks, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS 4 President ' �•r `"� Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Mark Graham [mailto:mgraham(aalbemarle.orq] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 12:26 PM To: Steve Driver; Amelia McCulley Cc: Greg Kamptner; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Megan Yaniglos Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Steve, Pleast note that Glenn Brooks is out of the office until Monday, April 7th. Both his voice mail and his email have a notification set to inform people of this, so you should have received that notice. Mark From: Steve Driver [sdriver @terraengineering.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 5:14 PM To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Greg Kamptner; Mark Graham; David Benish; Glenn Brooks; Megan Yaniglos Subject: RE: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Amelia, Thanks for your response. No response regarding the applicant's meeting on Monday has been received from Glenn Brooks. The Proffer grading plan that the applicant submitted,the one the County has is extensive,comprehensive and meets all previous review comments provided by the reviewing regulatory agencies. It evolved through several iterative reviews by County planning and engineering staff,VDOT and ACSA. e.g. it includes final spot elevations for culvert pipes,garage elevations, house finish floors,#of floors,final specific lot grading, numbers of steps at each house,driveway and lot grading,final road design, profiles, and permanent stormwater basins. All complies with previous engineering review and with the Proffer. Preliminary stormwater computations and water quality forms were also submitted, reviewed and revised to comply with engineering review comments.This proffer grading should be approvable by the County engineer with a condition that the grading may be modified if necessary with final construction plans.This is how the proffers are set up. Everything does comply and will comply.The proffer grading plan has been completed since January 2013, when the denial letter was issued. The only thing not included (which is not in the proffer) are waterline, sanitary and storm sewer profiles (which are underway-they are not grading- but, by necessity,the grading accounted for these pipe locations and slopes).The proffer doesn't require profiles as part of the over-lot grading plan. The E+SC, as part of the WPO,will be submittal along with the pipe profiles when completed. Please confirm with Glenn that the County will provide the proffer grading approval (item iii below)with condition as suggested above so that the applicant can then in turn receive preliminary plat approval (item iv below). Please let us know when the approval letter(s)will be issued by the County.Time is of the essence. 5 w The applicant intends to submit final construction plans next, which will be a repeat of the previous proffer grading (that the applicant is seeking approval on) and any tweaks needed, along with the full WPO w/E+SC, including pipe profiles. Record correspondence with the County: Applicant responses dated January 17, 2013 to a County Letter dated January 2, 2013: PART A 1. The final proffer grading was completed. Item 1. 2. All Preliminary Plat Deficiencies, items numbered 2 through 5 were addressed. PART B 3. VDOT comments, item 1, have been addressed. 4. Fire comment, item 2 has been addressed. PART C Item i—COMPLETION OF BONDED IMPROVEMENTS-has been satisfied. Item ii -COMPLETION OF PROFFER GRADING PLAN—has been satisfied. Item iii—COUNTY ENGINEER APPROVAL OF PROFFER GRADING PLAN, PENDING—this is what the applicant is requesting. All comments have been addressed. Item iv—PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, PENDING—this is what the applicant is requesting.All comments have been addressed. Item v—WPO and E+SC(Final Plans) IN PROGRESS This was the recommended order or requirements provided by County staff. Specific to the process set forth by County staff on January 2, 2013,we need a date the approval letter for item iii and item iv will be issued to the applicant. Thank you, Steve Steven L. Driver, PE, LS President Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC 2374 Stuarts Draft Highway Stuarts Draft, VA 24477 PH: (434) 244-0600 x103 PH: (540) 337-4591 x103 FX: (540) 337-5291 C: (434) 989-8786 From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AM000LLE@ albemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 2:30 PM To: Steve Driver Cc: Megan Yaniglos Subject: Fontana, 4C- Proffer 2 grading approval Steve, I've reviewed the proffer language and discussed it with staff. I agree that a full-blown WPO plan and application are not required with the preliminary plat for compliance with proffer#2. The information the 6 grading plan must show as listelerrn the proffer is extensive and must becluded. In addition, the proffer states that the Final Grading plan shall also show "other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements of this proffer."