HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201500008 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2016-03-31'AL ,
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Yaniglos, Principal Planner
From: Francis MacCall, Principal Planner
Division: Zoning
Date: March 31, 2016
Subject: ZMA 2015-00008 Adelaide
Please consider the following comments:
1. Application plan should show entire +- "- 4-..-1--4 -;--- ...---
imnrnvPmPnt- arP alnnn Rni ita 9F Possibly provide a page that has the plans on Sheet 4
and 5 reduced in scale so that the entire parcel can be captured on one page showing that all
of the area to the southwest is being designated as open space and that there will not be
improvements within this open space along Route 250.
2. The LAND USE LEGEND on sheet 4 of the Application Plan should have the breakdown of
Area in Residential lots not just "RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AREAS". The number on
the in the proffer and on the plan (93) does not match the area in the table. If all 93 dwellings
will be on separate lots then with the minimum lot size for R-6 being 7,260 square feet would
mean there would be 15.5 acres in residential lots and not 8.8 acres as the LAND USE
LEGEND shows. 8.8 acres comes out to only 52 dwellings on separate lots. If there intent is to
take advantage of the clustering provision within R-6 then that should be stated since this
would not require a minimum lot size for the 93 dwellings and this may only use 8.8 acrt Add
the following language to Note #4 on Page 4 regarding the R-6 Clustering "...of open space.
The lots once created with a subdivision plat will not require a minimum lot size per the R-6
Clustering provision.
3. The road cross section on sheet 5 should reference the setbacks from Section 4.19 of the
Zoning Ordinance. These were developed to promote the Neighborhood Model so they should
be used appropriately and shown proper Addressed
4. Are those parking areas on sheet 5 necessary for this plan? It just needs to be as clear as
possible that the main things for this rezoning are what show up on the proffered plan.
Addressed
5. Acreage to be rezoned. The plats reference a total of 19.975 acres (page 3 of the plan), the
proffers reference 20.4 acres (page 1 of the proffers) and the application plan references 20
acres (page 4 of the application plan). Please make sure that the reference to the actual
acreage of the properties to be rezoned is the same on all part of the proposal. Is there a new
survey that shows 20.4 acres or 20 acres?
6. Proffers general -
On the first page change the reference to Master Plan to Application Plan as follows
"Zoning Requested: R6 -Residential with Proffered Application Plan"
Proffer #2 - The last sentence should say "... shall be in general accord..."
7. Proffers general - Eventually we need to make sure that all proffers use the current standard
language for certain proffers. County attorney review of final proffers will be needed. Some of
these may be the correct way they should be written but we need to verify this.
8. Other triggers may need to be applied to revised proffers, i.e. when certain improvements will
be completed.
9. The first proffer should be the one that proffers the application plan. (See 7b below)
10. Proffer #2 -
a. This should probably read something like "There shall be no more than 93 dwelling
units within the Project"
b. The second sentence of this proffer should be at the beginning of the proffers and
should use standard language about the Project is to be developed in general accord
with the application plan (see comment #5). Are there major elements that will be
required? If so list in the proffer about being in general accord. I know this is stated on
sheet 4 but should be in the actual proffer.
11. Proffer #3 - Use standard language for dedicating an easement to public use. A trigger for
when this is to happen should be within this proffer.
12. Proffer #4 - Use standard language for this proffer.