Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600007 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2016-02-26County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434-296-5832 Memorandum To: Justin Shimp (justinkshimp-en ing eering com) From: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: February 26, 2016 Subject: SDP201600007 Inglewood Terrace — Final Site Plan Fax 434-972-4126 The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.): [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] Conditions of Initial Plan Approval: 1. [Comment] This application was reviewed against Site Development Plan requirements only. Lot lines and a `private road' are shown on the plan, but no subdivision application, nor private road request, nor road plans have been submitted. Any subdivision related comments are provided for reference only unless necessary for site plan approval. Final: Comment still valid. 2. [32.5.2(m)] The private street serving the development is proposed within an existing publicly dedicated right-of-way, this is not approvable. VDOT never accepted the portion of the right-of-way labeled as `Unimproved Inglewood Drive' into the State Secondary System and the County still owns it. Either pursue vacation of the right of way pursuant to State Code 15.2-2272 prior to final site plan and/or final subdivision plat approval OR upgrade the existing roadway to meet current VDOT standards from the point where VDOT maintenance ends. This will include a suitable turn around at the end of state maintenance, removal of the existing parking area, continuation of curb and gutter, tie in of the existing driveway of TMP 061KO- 05-OD-00400, and the dedication of right-of-way or easements as necessary. Please show these improvements and easements or right-of-way prior to final site plan and/ or subdivision plat approval. Final: The applicant has chosen to upgrade the existing Publicly dedicated right-of-way to meet VDOT standards for a public road. Road plans shall be submitted, approved, and the road built or bonded prior to final site plan approval. 3. [Comment] Approval and recordation of a plat showing the vacation of the property line between TMP 61K -10 -OA and TMP 61K-10-OA2 is required prior to final site plan approval. Include the deed book/page reference number on the final site plan. It may be appropriate to combine all platting items on a single plat (if other items exist). Final: The applicant has submitted a boundary line vacation plat, SUB2016-3. The plat shall be approved and recorded prior to final site plan approval. 4. [Comment] VDOT approval of the proposed entrance to the site shall be required prior to final site plan approval. Final: Pending VDOT approval. 5. [14-412(A)(3), 14-412(A)(3)(b) and 14-412(B)] VDOT road standards apply to the proposed private street. Show the 24' required width FC/FC on the final site plan. Final: The County Engineering may permit the width of the private streets to be 20' FC/FC per the design standards manual. 6. [32.5.2(i), 15.2.1(3, 14-233(B)1, 14-234] A private street request must be submitted prior to final subdivision plat approval. This private street request can be reviewed administratively due to the presence of attached dwellings. A maintenance agreement for the private street must be submitted for review and approval by the County Attorney's Office with the subdivision application. Final: Comment not addressed. Item shall be addressed prior to final subdivision plat approval. 7. [32.7.2.2, 14-410(H), 14-4221 Private Streets in the Development Area. 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 (Sidewalks and planting strips for street trees and other vegetation shall be established on both sides of each new street within a subdivision creating lots for single family detached and single family attached dwellings in the development areas) Revise to provide sidewalks and landscape strips on both sides of the new street. Otherwise submit variation or exception request pursuant to Section 14-422(F) & 14-203.1. This item shall be acted on prior to final subdivision plat and final site plan approval. Final: Comment not addressed. Item shall be addressed prior to final site plan approval. 8. [32.5.2(n), 4.12.15(8)] Curb and gutter in parking areas and along travelways. Either provide the required curb and gutters in the parking area or submit a request and justification for a modification/waiver under Section 4.12.2(C) & (C)2. This is an agent approved waiver which can only be acted on after consultation with the County Engineer, who shall advise whether the proposed waiver or modification would equally or better serve the public health, safety or welfare. This item shall be acted on prior to final subdivision plat and final site plan approval. Final: Comment not addressed. Item shall be addressed prior to final site plan approval. 9. 132.5.2(b), 4.12.16(c)] Minimum parking space size. Are the 6' -wide parking spaces fronting Lots 4-9 for motorcycles/mopeds? If so, label the spaces as such. If not, on the plan label what they are being utilized for. These spaces shall not be counted towards the minimum required spaces. Final: Comment addressed. 10. [4.12.16(C)] The two proposed parking spaces fronting TMP 061KO-05-OD-00400 are required to be 18' in length. Currently they are depicted as 16' in length. Revise the final site plan accordingly. Final: Comment no longer relevant, plans were modified to omit these spaces. 11. [32.5.2(i)] Street trees shall be required for this development. Prior to final site plan approval a landscape plan shall be provided. Final: A landscape plan has been provided. Detailed landscape comments are provided below in "Additional Comments". 12. [32.5.2(i), 4.6.3, 15.2.1(3), 15.3] Setbacks. The setbacks throughout the plan are not accurately depicted. This development is classified as "infill development" pursuant to Section 4.19 of the County Code. The correct setbacks for this development are as follows: Front Minimum — 30 foot Front Maximum — none Side Minimum & Maximum — none Rear Minimum - 20 foot Rear Maximum — none Final: The front setbacks along Lots 1— 3 are incorrectly depicted. Pursuant to Section 4.19(6) the setbacks shall be measured from the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside of the right-of-way. 13. [32.5.2(f)] Per the June 19, 2015 letter by David L. Powell, Environmental Specialist, which was submitted to staff on October 29, 2015, the stream feature has been categorized as an Intermittent Stream. The study 2 was reviewed by County Engineering staff and has been determined to be adequate. An adjacent property owner has contacted staff and expressed his concerns with this study and has opted to contract a stream categorization study of his own by a licensed professional. At the time of this approval letter the second study has not been provided. When the study is submitted it shall be considered and reviewed by County Engineering staff. If the second study contradicts the June 19`h, 2015 study, the County Engineer will make a determination to classify the stream. Final: Comment not addressed. On Jan 5, 2016 a second stream classification study was submitted by adiacent landowners, which conflicts with the findings of the V study. Because there are two conflicting stream classification studies the County Engineer is requiring a third and final stream classification study be conducted by a mutually agreed upon professional entity to classify the stream. If the applicant and the neighboring property owners cannot agree upon a 3rd party to conduct the study then the US Army Corps of Engineers will be required to conduct the study. The final site plan shall not be approved until the stream classification is resolved to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. Please contact Lee Miller, acting coordinator for the Barter Brook Subdivision at le miller(a%prodiu.net to coordinate this study. 14. [32.5.2(d), 32.5.2(f)] The 9' retaining wall is acting as a dam for the stream that may cause flooding on neighboring properties in the event of heavy rainfall. Have any studies been conducted to assess the max flow of this stream to assure that the 60" storm sewer pipe is adequate to avoid such flooding? If so, please provide copies of the study to myself and Engineering. This item may pose an issue for the development during the WPO plan review of the project. Please work with Engineering staff to address this concern prior to final site plan approval. Also, the `New 60" HDPE Storm Sewer' discharges water into the existing swale on TMP 61K -5-D-4. Will piping the water under the proposed buildings increase the velocity/flow of discharged water potentially increasing erosion on the neighboring property and/or impact properties downstream? During the WPO plan review and prior to final site plan approval please work with Engineering staff to address this concern. Final: The WPO plan shall be approved prior to final site plan approval. The site plan shall reflect approved WPO. 15. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.71 Screening. The proposed outfall of the stream shall be screened from the adjacent residential lots (TMP 061KO-05-OD-00400& 061KO-09-00-003BO). Provide the required screening on the final site plan's landscape plan. Final: Comment not addressed. 16. [32.5.2(a), 15.4.1, 3.11 Maintenance of existing wooded areas. For the undisturbed areas to qualify for a 10% density bonus, demonstrate in an exhibit that the area meets the definition of "Wooded Areas" per section 3.1 of the ordinance. Provide the exhibit and a conservation plan as specified in section 32.7.9 prior to final site plan approval and/or final subdivision plat approval. Final: Comment not addressed. On the final subdivision plat, show the conservation area and provide the following note: "Lot acreages shown hereon were calculated under the Bonus Level Cluster development requirements. Lots shown hereon comply with section 15.4.1 "Environmental standards" by conserving acreage area that comprises of the total area of the subdivided parcels. " Final: Item shall be addressed prior to final subdivision plat approval. 17. [32.5.2(a), 15.4.3] Affordable housing. Clearly identify the affordable unit on the final subdivision plat. Final: Item shall be addressed prior to final subdivision plat approval. 18. [32.5.2(a), 15.5, 15.3, 4.71 Cluster Development. On the plan clearly distinguish what area is being counted towards the required Open Space B & C, and omit the square footage for the road and parking from the open space totals. Final: Comment not addressed. On the final subdivision plat list who shall own and maintain the open space. An open space maintenance agreement approved by the County Attorney's office shall be required prior to final subdivision plat approval. Final: Shall be addressed on final subdivision plat. 3 19. [32.5.2(a), 15.5, 15.3, 4.71 Cluster Development. On sheet C1, under Impervious Area Schedule, 33,500 SF is listed under "Area in open space"; however, on sheet C3 open space A -D add up to 27,676 SF. Correct and coordinate calculations throughout the plans. Final: Comment not addressed. 20. [32.5.2(d)] Prior to final site plan approval provide a temporary grading and construction easement or license agreement for the installation of the proposed DI and New 15" HDPE Storm Sewer on TMP 061KO- 05-OC-01300. Also, revise the plan to provide this property owner's name and TMP. Final: Comment no longer relevant as there is no work proposed on adioining neighbor's property; rather, the work will take place in the existing right-of-way. 21. [32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(n)] Dimensions. On the plan provide the dimensions of the proposed structures. Final: Comment addressed. 22. [Comment] On the plans provide the deed book page reference information for the existing 30' Joint Access Easement. Staff research determined that the maintenance agreement for this join access easement is D131654-291. Revise accordingly. Final: Comment not addressed. 23. [Comment] The adjacent property owner of TMP 061KO-10-00-OOOA1 has a portion of his existing driveway on land that is part of your development and property (TMP 061 KO- 10-00-OOOA2). It appears that some grading is taking place on a portion of his driveway that is on your land. He has contacted County staff (Engineering and myself) and is very concerned with this aspect of the plans and does not want this to take place. It is recommended that you contact this citizen and try and work out this issue. I have his contact information and will provide it to you upon your request. Final: The developer has been made aware of this recommendation. 24. [32.5.2(n) & (p)] The following will be required for final site plan approval: - If lighting is proposed: Outdoor lighting information including a photometric plan and location, description, and photograph or diagram of each type of outdoor luminaire [Sec. 32.7.8 & Sec. 4.17] Final: Comment addressed. No lighting proposed. - A landscape plan in accordance with [Sec. 32.7.9]. Final: A landscape plan has been provided. Detailed landscape comments are provided below in "Additional Comments". Additional Comments 1. [32.7.2.2, 14-410(H), 14-422] Streets and Travelways. Each private street and travelway within a development shall be designed and constructed to the standards for private streets in chapter 14. Provide curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and landscape strips on both sides of the new private road and the public road. Otherwise submit the applicable variation or exception request pursuant to Sections 14-410(I) and 14-422(F) and 14-203.1 for consideration. 2. [14-403, 14-4121 Lot frontage. Private street easements shall be a minimum of 30' wide to provide frontage for the proposed lots. Prior to final site plan and final subdivision plat approval revise the required easement. 3. [Comment] Various pages throughout the site plan depict the existing asphalt parking fronting TMP 061KO-05- OD-00400 as remaining in the 50' public right-of-way; however, these spaces shall be removed unless VDOT approves their location on the road plan and is willing to maintain them. 4. [32.5.2(i)] Streets. Label the proposed extension of Inglewood Drive as "Public Road". 5. [4.11.3, 4.11.4] Structures within easements. A portion of the rear deck for Lot 1 is within an existing 20' waterline easement. Either provide approval from the easement holder that the deck is permitted within the easement or revise the plan to take the deck completely out of the easement. 4 6. [32.5.2(n)] Proposed improvements. How is daily household trash going to be disposed of for these units? Depict the location, dimensions, and screening of a dumpster for use by the residents. If each lot is going to have it's own trash container for curbside pickup, where are these containers going to be stored when not in use? If stored behind the lots how are the middle units going to gain access over surrounding lots? Provide a note on the plan. 7. [32.7.9.4] Landscaping. Throughout the plan there are numerous conflicts between required landscaping and proposed/existing easements. - Four (4) Green Vase Zelkova street trees proposed within the 20' storm easement - Three (3) Autumn Blaze Maple parking lot trees fronting Lots 7-9 proposed within 20' and 30' storm easements - Two (2) Green Vase Zelkova street trees fronting Lots 1 and 2 overtop of the sewer line connections Either revise the location of the proposed easements to avoid conflict with proposed plantings or revise the planting locations. If the plantings are to remain provide written documentation from the easement holders that they are permitted. 8. [32.7.9.4] Landscaping. All required plantings located outside of the right-of-way on individual lots shall be within landscape easements which shall be depicted on the final subdivision plat and recorded with a maintenance agreement approved by the County. 9. [32.7.9.5(d)] Location and spacing of street trees. The site is short two (2) of the required street trees. Based on the prevalence of easements these two (2) trees shall be located in either open space areas onsite or in the rear yards of Lots 1 — 6 within an easement. 10. [32.7.9.6(b)] Landscaping within parking area. Swap out the plantings fronting Lots 7-9 from large shade trees to shrubs. 11. [32.7.9.7(3)] Screening. Provide a single row of evergreen screening (trees or shrubs) at the base of all retaining walls on Lots 2-6. This screening will help reduce the visual impacts of these walls on the neighboring property. 12. [32.7.9.5(c)] Minimum caliper of street trees. Correct the typographical error on sheet C6 under Required Street Tree from 1-1.5" to 1.5". 13. [Design Standards Manual] For safety reasons provide a slightly opaque fence (minimum of 4' tall) atop the 5' retaining wall on Lot 2. Also, provide a typical detail. Provide guardrail or fencing atop the 9' tall retention wall adjacent to Lot 7. 14. [Comment] Revise the title of the plan from SDP2015-20 to SDP2016-7. 15. [Comment] The final site plan shall not be approved until all approvals are granted from various reviewers. Those who have yet to approve the plan are Planning, ACSA, VDOT, Engineering, and E911. Staff has provided references to the County Code. In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.3.5 of Chapter 18, if the applicant fails to submit a revised plan to address all of the requirements within six (6) months after the date of this letter, then the application shall be deemed voluntarily withdrawn. Please contact Christopher Perez at the Division of Current Development at cperez@albemarle. org or 434-296-5832 ext. 3443 for further information. 5 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Christopher Perez, Planning From: Matt Wentland, Engineering Date: 22 February 2016 Subject: Inglewood Terrace (SDP201600007) The final site plan for Ingleside Terrace has been reviewed. The following concerns should be addressed; 1. Due to two conflicting stream studies, Staff requests that a third study be performed, either by a third party agreed upon by both the homeowners and the developer or by the US Army Corps of Engineers. This third study will determine whether or not a buffer will be placed on the parcels in question and on all parcels downstream of the site. 2. Within the steep slopes overlay district, the maximum height of a single retaining wall is 6 feet [18-30.7.5]. This plan proposes a 9' to 10' wall passing through an area designated as a managed slope. Please adjust. Note that the minimum horizontal distance between individual walls in a stepped wall system is 3 feet. Provide certified wall plans. 3. The width of drainage easements should be calculated using the formula found in the Design Standards Manual (Easement Width = Pipe Diameter + 2' + 2(depth — 5') + 10'). 4. The minimum width for a private road easement is 30'. [Design Standards Manual] 5. The minimum sight distance on a private road is 100' and the minimum K for a sag curve is 15. [Design Standards Manual] 6. Verify that proper sight lines are provided at the parking on the inside of the curve on the private road. 7. Show stationing on the road centerline on the plan view. 8. Provide a barrier or guard rail at the end of the private road. 9. VDOT normally requires a 45' radius for turnarounds on residential streets, but may not be required due to distance from intersection. 10. The landscaping plan is showing trees planted inside the drainage easements directly over pipes. 11. Provide plans for the retaining wall and verification that there is no issue with the wall and wall foundation being submerged during storm events. It appears the 100yr storm event overtops the wall and runs into the buildings and the neighboring property. 12. Additional erosion control measures should be used below STI to ensure runoff does not enter the neighboring property. Demonstrate how ST1 will function during construction. It appears that it will be filled in almost immediately when the storm system and fill slope are installed. Comments for Final Site Plan (previously provided by Michelle Roberge and remain unaddressed on plans) 13. Retaining walls greater than 4' require railing. 14. A separate road plan will need to be approved and bonded prior to the approval of a subdivision plat. 15. VDOT approval is necessary for connection to public road and for improvements within their right-of-way. 16. Show groundcover, not grass, for slopes greater than 3:1. 17. A VSMP application shall be approved prior to the approval of the final site plan. 18. Verify guardrails are not warranted under GRIT manual. Otherwise, please show. file: SDP2016-7 Inglewood Terrace FSP.doc Christopher Perez From: Alex Morrison <amorrison@serviceauthority.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 11:03 AM To: Christopher Perez Subject: RE: SDP2016-7 Inglewood Terrace - Final Site Plan Chris, Correct, this is not an approval. They need construction approval through a separate review at the ACSA first. This is required because they are extending ACSA infrastructure. Once we give construction approval I will follow up with final site plan approval. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E. Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (0) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (C) 434-981-5577 (F) 434-979-0698 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez@albemarle.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 9:47 AM To: Alex Morrison Subject: RE: SDP2016-7 Inglewood Terrace - Final Site Plan Alex, Ok, so this is not an approval of the final site plan. 1st they need to submit construction plans to Mike for review. Then once those plans are reviewed there may be additional comments on the final site plan. once everything's addressed including all construction plan comments then ACSA will issue an approval. 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: Alex Morrison [mailto:amorrison@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 9:44 AM To: Christopher Perez <cperez@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: SDP2016-7 Inglewood Terrace - Final Site Plan Chris, I have reviewed the submittal for the above referenced plans. The applicant shall submit 3 copies of the plan along with water and sewer data sheets to the ACSA, Attn: Michael Vieira, to begin the construction review process. The applicant shall be aware that there are proposed retaining walls and decorative walls within 10' of proposed ACSA infrastructure. This will be a comment on the construction review in case the applicant wishes to address it before the construction review submittal. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E. Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (0) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (C) 434-981-5577 (F) 434-979-0698 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperezC@albemarle.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 8:36 AM To: Alex Morrison Subject: SDP2016-7 Inglewood Terrace — Final Site Plan Alex, SDP2016-7 Inglewood Terrace — Final Site Plan Friendly reminder. Have you completed your review of the above referenced plan? If not, when do you think you will wrap it up? Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development ICounty of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 Review Comments I-IrWITIM111,111TA Project Name: iglewootl Terrace - Final Dale Completed Nowlay, February 00, 2016 Final Plat Reviewer: Mdrew Slack _ oepadmeMoivsioNAgercy E911 _ Reviews CommeM; The applicant should contact this once with a list of three (3) proposed mi names for approval before the (nal plans are submillet! Review Comments ,.9.1.1.1 t Project Name: iglemootl Terrace - Final File Completed Sunday, February 14, 2016 Final Reviewer: 3obbie Gilmer _ Depaffioemll)ivision?Agency I Fire Rescue Reviews Comments Basetl on plans dated 4/20/15. I No comments or o*ctions_ Review Comments • l ,.l.l.l.l l Project Name: iglemootl Terrace - Final Dale Completed Netlnesday, February 03, 2016 Final Reviewer: lay Schlothauer _ Depaffinoemll)ivision?Agency I Inspections Reviews Comments: Based on Was receieetl February 1, 2016_ I No comments or conddions_