HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400013 Review Comments 2014-11-03 *re w
41025,p�OF A1,
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Sarah Baldwin,Zoning
From: Glenn Brooks,Engineering
Date: 3 Nov 2014
Subject: Royal Orchard,critical slopes disturbance request for a tower and road(SP2014000_)
The revision to the critical slopes waiver request has been reviewed.
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
This is a wooded hillside above Rt. 64. The applicant is proposing to create a road,partially over an
existing path,to a proposed tower site.
Areas Acres
Total site 12.15 acre parcel (per GIS
system)
Critical slopes Approx. 100%of site
Critical slopes disturbed See graphics provided
It is noted that the applicant's letter indicates 8.85 acres of land and a"net increase of disturbed critical
slopes"of 1,911 square feet. This refers to the tower lease area only. The actual plan,including road
improvements,currently shows 16,391 square feet of disturbance.
Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways,roads and utilities without reasonable
alternative locations:
This exemption,for improvements to the access,depends on the reasonable alternatives in road
improvements. It appears that more could be done to avoid disturbance by aligning the improvements with
the existing path.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18-4.2:
"movement of soil and rock"
Proper slope construction,control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement
of soil.
"excessive stormwater runoff'
Stormwater runoff will be increased in this area,based on the land disturbance and new slopes,
although it is isolated in this wooded site. The disturbance proposed(including the road)is still
enough so that this project requires a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan under the Virginia
Stormater Management Program. Stormwater management features may increase the area of
disturbance, and some indication of the applicant's plan to address such measures should be included.
"siltation"
Inspection and bonding by the County will attempt to ensure siltation control during construction.
However,in projects on such steep terrain,the only sure protection is to limit the area of disturbance,
and stabilize immediately with matting or stone. Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long
term stability.
jr✓ -..r
Albemarle County Community Development
Engineering Review comments
Page 2 of 3
"loss of aesthetic resource"
This area is close to Rt. 64.
"septic effluent"
Not applicable.
Based on the review above,there are no engineering concerns with the tower lease area. The road still
appears as though it could be arranged to align with the existing road or path,thus reducing critical slope
disturbance. I am attaching another graphic depicting possible grading that does not veer off over the hill
before approaching the turn-around point at the lease area. It is not clear why something like this would
not work.
µ_._.— -�`r7— r' —A
_
,X.,;
r� s) "� ..muss au ats�
- kIti Is 'It"---- - I? i xtw/
-----_-l; , ,�
�Q,
—__-- _ _,.. �"°aj\:\,\1.,.`,''`- {yryy Easns wmc,.a(rm)
BOYAL CROWD MD CORP
�.y� _ ��yy�. NMf.R,,) . PNKEt 4 6SOC-OD-00-0PiW.
-_.______,, , 1 W+" NF Zasc NuVI/NGIt
�N
` ,,,,,;:z_ t2,11
IYP i
`? 1713, ,
l\ VF
ar taws MPl_ -a, ` tK' ' _ _ _ -- - - • h
-)„,"I''''0;4'1--- ti .�\�- ,,
PpippsE),1'IB _ `\'_;,, 1:*` ",-,.Y..- 0,'' G-� ' --„APO__-
:tea
. � 1 _- A--
Vx¢tram BOO/-- --- __ -___= �� �4 r r l'...1 � 4 , y
EOM Mar - Z 9 It
BE aYTE(11) - ` _ ' 7s-
__ m .,•..mss t4• -. 1E7'
1
772:206 -- '-._♦
The previous comments regarding this waiver request are attached below for reference;
"I have taken a closer look at this now that I had to search for the proposed changes. I think the intent of
the wireless provisions was that disturbances normally remain at or below the 10,000sf regulatory
threshold for erosion control and stormwater management. This is especially pertinent under the new
state VSMP program,which we must now administer. This is the first project I have examined since we
adopted the new provisions.
This project is not exempt from the VSMP,as it is over the 10,000sf threshold. Is there a way it could be
modified to be below? While the critical slope issues remain about the same,the plan begs the
i..r
Albemarle County Community Development
Engineering Review comments
Page 3 of 3
question; why does the road have to be re-aligned? The application materials seem to indicate that
there are only minor modifications to the road for widening and stabilization, but this does not appear to
be the case on the plan. See below,where I have highlighted in red the areas of road which are
essentially new clearing.
_
F _
t f.94 s' st.n'*i
• e?'
I
y •
oo-
•
MAKER CW:7flF :sxn.e e.�m a I