HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800041 Review Comments 2009-01-30f'
IRG[N
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
January 30, 2009
Richard Spurzem
Neighborhood Investments- NP,LCC
PO Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Re: Variations from Application Plan for SDP - 2008 -00041 North Pointe Preliminary
Site Plan (Northwest Residential Area) dated May 2, 2008 — Advisory Comments
Dear Mr. Spurzem:
As promised at our meeting on Tuesday, January 20, 2009, this letter provides advisory
comments on how to address those features on the above - referenced site plan that
would require a variation. It further details points raised in Item 2. Buildings and parking
areas not in conservation areas of the letter to you from Amelia McCulley and me dated
September 23, 2008 in which we said that the location, number, design, layout and
orientation of buildings and parking areas not in conservation areas do not comply with
the Application Plan. That letter also indicated that when buildings and uses are shown
on an application plan, changes in their arrangement are permitted only if a variation is
granted under Albemarle County Code Section 18- 8.5.5.3(a) (2). The following advisory
comments are specific to the above referenced site plan submittal and do not anticipate
changes other than the potential deletion of the stormwater management (SWM) facility
in the vicinity of the proposed Korean Church.
Item 2.A. in the September 23 letter said that "Buildings and parking areas are shown on
the Site Plan in an area adjacent to SWM Facility #10 where the Application Plan shows
no buildings or parking." Item 2.B, said, "The number, design and layout of the buildings
shown on the Site Plan near SWM #10 results in proposed stormwater facilities which will
require construction of steep slopes inside the basins and cause parking lots near the
basins to have 10 foot retaining walls. Although details of the stormwater facilities were
not required on the application plan, the proposed grading and stormwater uses do not
comply with the Application Plan."
Under either of the following conditions, a variation could be approved to allow buildings
and parking areas near SWM #10 that were not shown on the Application Plan, The
conditions would be either to: 1) Establish slopes between the buildings /parking areas
and SWM #10 that are no steeper than 3:1 and vegetated, or, alternatively, to 2)
construct retaining walls no greater than 5 feet in height and terraced if necessary with a
planted shelf between the terraced walls of a minimum twice the width of the height of the
retaining walls. Under either condition, due to the resulting close proximity of the
a
buildings /parking areas to SWM #10 and visual changes from U.S. 29, a preliminary site
plan demonstrating appropriate design for erosion control, stormwater management and
safety as well as appearance from the Entrance Corridor would be necessary to allow me
to determine that the variation satisfies all of the elements in Albemarle County Code
Section 18- 8.5.5.3(c) and, in particular for this variation, that the variation "is in general
accord with the purpose and intent of the approved application ". Therefore, the
preliminary site plan would need to be revised to show one of these two conditions. Also
please note that, as proffered in Section I1. Entrance Corridors 2.2, Appearance of Storm
Water Management ( "SWM ") Facilities of the North Pointe Proffer Statement dated July
20, 2006, this SWM facility will require review and approval by the ARB.
Item 2.C. in the September 23 letter said that, "Unit orientation towards Northwest
Passage is different than shown on the Application Plan on both the western and eastern
side of Northwest Passage. Units were not shown along the street on the western side of
Northwest Passage on the Application Plan." A variation could be approved if the units
face the street and have sidewalks connecting the units to sidewalks along the street.
The Northwest Passage street section would need to include sidewalks and street trees
on both sides of the street with street trees located between the back of the curb and the
sidewalk. These features would allow me to determine that the variation satisfies all of
the elements in Albemarle County Code Section 18- 8.5.5.3(c) and, in particular for this
variation, that the variation "is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the
approved application ". Either the preliminary site plan would need to be revised to reflect
these features or its approval conditioned on the provision of these features as necessary
for final site plan approval. Road plans submitted with the final site plan also would need
to reflect these features.
Item 2.D. in the September 23 letter said that, "Units on the western side of Northwest
Passage are shown on the Site Plan in areas where no development was shown on the
Application Plan. The number, design, and layout of these buildings cause the need for a
stormwater management facility west of the easement for the Korean Church ..." I
indicated in our January 20 meeting that this stormwater management facility as located
on the site plan cannot be varied under Albemarle County Code Section 18- 8.5.5.3(a)(2)
because "major elements shown on the [application] plan and their relationships" would
not "remain the same ". However, it is my understanding that, based on alternative
designs for handling stormwater discussed with Mark Graham at that meeting, your
engineer would be looking into designs that would not require this stormwater
management facility. Therefore, we are assuming this facility will be omitted and other
stormwater management solutions will be incorporated into the developed area.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these advisory comments and please do not
hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. We hope this letter provides
helpful information to allow this project to move forward.
Sincerely,
U , P. 1 / V. Wane,Cilimberg
Director W Planning'
Cc: Larry Davis
Mark Graham
Amelia McCulley
Gerald Gatobu
2
Page I of 2
Gerald Gatobu
From: Glenn Brooks
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 1:00 PM
To: Mark Graham; Elaine Echols; Amelia McCulley; Bill Fritz, Gerald Gatobu
Subject: RE: North Point - Northwest Residential Area -DWG
I have taken a look at the new plan. This appears to be exactly the same plan as the last submittal, with onechange; the stormwater basins have been removed on the lower side. The area of concern, specifically the ridgeabovetheriver, appears to be completely unchanged.
Here is a view of the new plan overlay. The gray plan is the rezoning. The next one, in blue, is the submittal ofJanuary. The last one, in red, is the current submittal. If you look carefully, you will see that the only blue linesshowingarethestormwaterbasinsbelowthedevelopment.
E- r
Thus, I am forced to conclude that the primary issue of the conservation line on the ridge is unresolved.Furthermore, a new issue is the change in the stormwater management concept, which essentially leaves much ofthesiteinuncontrolledrelease, to be compensated for upstream. This does not appear to be acceptableconsideringtherezoningplan, and considering commitments to go above and beyond the minimum requirements.
From: Mark Graham
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 1 :35 PM
To: Glenn Brooks
Cc: Elaine Echols; Amelia McCulley; Bill Fritz; Gerald GatobuSubject: FW: North Point - Northwest Residential Area - DWG
Glenn,
3/20/2009
Page 2 of 2
This is what I received from WW.
After reviewing this against the approve rezoning, I thought it matched within the accuracy limits of the topo and
we should consider this issue addressed.
From: Paty Saternye (ma i Ito: psaternye @wwassociates.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 3:38 PM
To: Wayne Cilimberg; Mark Graham
Cc: 'Richard T. Spurzem'; 'Herbert F. White III'
Subject: North Point - Northwest Residential Area - DWG
Mr. Cilimberg & Mr. Graham,
Attached you will find the requested DWG file for the North Pointe Northwest Residential Area Preliminary Site
Plan.
I have created an ETransmit of the file in AutoCAD 2004 file format. Please let me know if you or anyone on
your staff has a problem accessing the drawing.
Thank you,
Paty Saternye
Planner
WAd r.
ASSQCIA Es
Office Phone: 434.964.1643
Main: 434.984.2700
Fax: 434.978.1444
1402 Greenbrier Place
Charlottesville, VA 22901
psaternyeAwwassociates.net
www.wwassociates.net
3/20/2009
OF .1I,.
IR(:INI
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
DATE: April 2, 2008
Richard Spurzem
P.O. Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA, 22903.
RE: SDP - 2008 -00041 North Pointe Northwest Residential Area Preliminary.
Dear Sir /Madam,
The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Preliminary
comments for the following divisions of the Department of Conununity Development and other agencies,
as applicable, are attached:
Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner)
Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Engineer)
Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (E -911)
Albemarle County Division of Planning (ARB Principle Planner)
Albemarle County Division of Inspections
Albemarle County Division of Planning (Development Area Principle Planner)
Virginia Department of Transportation
Albemarle County Service Authority/ Rivanna Water and Sewer.
Comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed, and should
not be considered final. However, the Site Review Committee has attempted to identify all issues that
could affect approval of the proposed project.
Please make the revisions that have been identified as necessary for preliminary approval by the Site
Review Committee. If you choose not to make the requested revisions, please submit in writing
justification for not incorporating such revisions. Submit eight (8) full size copies and one (1) 1 1" x 17"
copy to the Department of Conununity Development including responses to each of the attached
comments of the Site Review Committee by Monday April 14 2008. Failure to submit this information
by this date will result in suspension of the review schedule. Review will resume when revisions are
submitted along with a reinstatement fee of $65.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely
Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Current Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902 -4596
Phone: (434)296 -5832 Ext 3385
Fax: (434)972-4126
C: \Geralds Docs \SDP \North Pointe \North Pointe Post -SRC Denial (4) JBS.doc
nts
IRGINI
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
26 November 2007
Richard T Spurzem
Neighborhood Properties Inc
P.O. Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: SDP - 2007 -00087 North Pointe
Dear Mr. Spurzem:
Pursuant to Section 32.4.2.6 of Chapter 18 of the Albemarle County Code, the above referenced site plan
is disapproved. This action has been taken because the site plan, dated 08/31/2007 and revised on
10/15/2007, has not addressed all comments of the Site Review Committee, the proffers of ZMA- 2000 -9
and the conditions of SP- 2002 -72 and SP- 2006 -34. Those items for which the site is not in compliance
are (All references to sections 17 or 18 are references to the Albemarle County Code):
I. The site plan is not in conformity with the approved application plan of ZMA- 2000 -9 for the
following reasons. This deficiency may be addressed by revising the site plan seeking a
variation from the approved application plan in accord with section 18- 8.5.5.3 or amending the
application plan through a rezoning of the property. (Comments from Elaine Echols)
The eastern conservation area begins at the top of the slope where critical slopes begin. Buildings
and parking areas are shown in the conservation area. Buildings and parking cannot be shown or
placed in a conservation area. This item cannot be varied.
2. The conservation line near the northern floodplain crossing is shown incorrectly causing the
appearance of disturbance. If the western conservation line were correctly shown, there would
not be disturbance in that area shown on the plan. This item should be corrected.
3. In this same area, an access easement to the Korean Church parcel is shown as providing public
access to the greenway. This item could be varied; however, it would be dependent on how the
access easement language is written between the Church and the owner.
4. More building area is shown west of Northwest Passage than was shown on the application plan.
Where a single row of buildings was shown west of Northwest Passage, there are now three rows
of buildings. Where driveways were shown on the application plan, there are buildings shown on
the site plan. This greater intensity results in less area for stormwater management. Less area for
stormwater management is causing steep slopes and retaining walls over 10 feet in height close to
residential buildings. This item could be varied; however, it is very unlikely that the Planning
Director would grant a variation because of the negative effects of the steep slopes, tall retaining
walls, and location of the retaining walls.
C: \Geralds_Docs \SDP \North Pointe \North Pointe Post -SRC Denial (4) JBS.doc
M
5. Buildings and parking are shown on the site plan in an area adjacent to SWM Facility #10 where
the application plan shows no development. Four buildings in this area also cause stormwater
facilities to have steep slopes and retaining walls. This item could be varied; however, it is very
unlikely that the Planning Director would grant a variation because of the negative effects of the
steep slopes and location of the retaining walls close to the residential units.
6. Unit orientation is different than shown on the application plan in several places. On the western
side of Northwest Passage units were not shown along the street resulting in approval of a street
section in the rezoning that did not include a sidewalk. This item could be varied which might be
successful because it creates a better street face. If it is varied, the street section would need to
include sidewalks and street trees on both sides of Northwest Passage where street trees are
between the back of the curb and the sidewalk.
II. EnOneerine Comments from Jonathan Sharp have not been fully addressed. Rev 1 comments
refer to the plan revised on October 15, 2007. Those items that have not been addressed are
Engineering recommends denial of the preliminary site plan. Before Engineering can recommend
preliminary approval to the site plan, the following comments must be addressed (please make sure to
make note of additional preliminary plan comments):
1.The layout of the site has changed significantly compared to the ZMA. The approval of the new
layout may need a variation of the ZMA. [per ZMA and SP]
Revl: The preliminary plan is not in conformance with the application plan. See Elaine
Echols' latest comments as to how the preliminary plan is not in conformance with the
application plan. [18- 8.5.5.2.a,c1 eV4 Kt
u 2.Please remove all work in the floodplain (other than grading for Northwest Passage or utilities).
p The floodplain line shown on the plans abruptly stops and also appears to branch off. Please
clarify this. [per ZMA- 2000 -9 and SP- 2006 -34]
Revl : Work in the floodplain is not permitted in areas not approved per the application plan
and special use permit concept plans. Grading is shown in the floodplain below a retaining
3
wall on the west side of the project. [18- 8.5.5.2a,c,18- 30.3.3.4
Please remove all work in the utility conservation areas (other than utilities, grading for the
Northwest Passage, or SWM facilities. Please remove all work/grading/retaining walls in the
conservation areas. [per ZMA- 2000 -9 and SP- 2002 -72]
Revl: The conservation areas do not match the application plan (see Elaine's latest
comments). [18- 8.5.5.2a,c1
4 Please provide removal rate calculations and drainage area maps for each SWM facility. Please
indicate the type of facility proposed. Please clarify the `potential' biofilters. At the preliminary44Csiteplanstage, there should not be any potential facilities, only proposed facilities. Please show
V•N -\
the proposed outlet locations for all SWM facilities. [17- 312(C), 17- 315(B), 17- 315(C)]
Rev]: The proposed drainage area maps and removal rate calculations shown on the
preliminary site plan are inadequate. The drainage area and proposed impervious area for
the school should be included with proposed facility #10. [18- 32.5.6k, 17 -3031
Additional preliminary site plan comments:
5. (Rev 1): The preliminary site plan fails to adequately show the proffered improvements for the
proposed residential phase per the application plan and proffers. The following road
improvements must be shown on the preliminary site plan and must be constructed during the
construction of this residential development: (Proffer 5.3.1 c 1) [18- 8.5.5.2a,c1 JP
Northwest Passage from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard.lo aref 16
rics o
I> If not already constructed, North Pointe Boulevard between Northside Drive East and
Northwest Passage. P $46v 2
Naw
C: \Geralds_Docs \SDP \North Pointe \North Pointe Post -SRC Denial (4) JBS.doc
X . (Rev 1) The preliminary site plan inadequately shows access easements per the application
plan. The proposed access easements are not legibly shown.(SP condition 7c) [18- 32.5.6i/
Rev 1) Please show the 50' planting buffer line along Rte. 29 (Proffer 2.1)
v /$. (Rev 1) The preliminary site plans fails show/ include the Special Use Permit Conditions for
Stream Crossing (SP200600034) on the plan. Please include the Special Use Permit Conditions
for the Stream Crossing on the plans (SP- 2006 - 00034). The preliminary site plan is in accord with
the conditions for the Stream Crossing (SP- 2006 - 00034). The 11 conditions found in
SP200600034) are required to be adequately addressed during the final site plan approval
process. [18-32.5.
9 (Rev I) The road cross section used (A) may not be the best suitable cross section for areas of
road where buildings front along Northwest Passage. A section with sidewalk on the other side of
the planting strip may be more suitable with this layout (NWP1 section on sheet D1 of the
application plan).
III. Proffers have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not
been addressed are:
II Entrance corridor Section 2.1 Compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site
plan and any future site plan submittal]. Applicant must delineate the location of the 50 foot
buffer along the entrance corridor with is prelirrlinary site plan. See engineering comment
number 7 for guidance. (Engineering) 1 2. 1
Section 3.1 Total build -out Compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan].
Please provide a chart on the plan that contains the total of dwelling units included in this
preliminary site plan. This chart will be maintained for each site plan and subdivision to track the
running total of dwellings in the project. [18- 32.5.6S.]
3. Section 4.1 Flood Plain: compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan and
future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle County Engineering Review.
See Engineering comment number 2 for guidance.
4. Section 4.2 Storm Water Management Plan Compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle
County Engineering Review. See Engineering comment number 4 for guidance.
ection 5.1 Internal street construction standards compliance: [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. All proffered transportation
improvements must be shown on the preliminary plan. See Engineering comment number 5 for
guidance.
6.,-Section 5.3.1.c Phase III Road Improvements compliance. [Action required with this
7Y preliminary site plan].Approval of a subdivision plat or site plan for any development of either
the Virginia Land Trust Company (32 -22K) or the Jackson Trust Property (32 -22H) or any
portion thereof triggers this proffer. See Engineering comment numbers for guidance.
7 Section 5.3.1.C.1. Northernmost Entrance (opposite Lewis and Clark Drive) on U.S. Route
29 compliance: [Highly important action required with this preliminary site plan and at
final site plan submittal] this proffer applies to this preliminary site plan. Please provide
conceptual road plans addressing all Road improvements for the Northernmost Entrance on 29
opposite Lewis & Clark Drive). See section i -v of the proffers for specific improvements. i U.S.
route 29 Southbound will require construction of a left turn lane with tape (ii) Northwest Passage
from U Ronte 29 to North Point- BDulevard will have to be constructed/addressed with th
preliminary and final site plan (iii) U.S. Route 29 Northbound-- construction of a right hand turn
lane, the geometr of which will be subject to VDOT approval, and (iv) I not a ready_
constructed North Pointe Boulevard-12et_ween North-side Drive East and Northwest Passage and
construction subiect to signal timi
improvements proffered for phas III (5.3.1.C.) must be shown on the preliminary site-p
Detailed pans and computations will berequired at final site plan. See Engineering comme
number 5for guidan
S8. ion 5.3.3 Compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan and future site
plan submittal VDOT approval fp ] o U.S. 29 intersection signal timing plan must be noted on the
plan as a condition of final approval.
C: ds_Docs \SDP\North Pointe\North Pointe Post -SRC Denial (4) JBS.doc
9. Section 8.2 Affordable Housing compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site
plan and future final site plan submittal] Please show a running total of all affordable housing
proposed at this stage (preliminary site plan) as well as all future preliminary and final site plan
applications for North Pointe. Label the affordable housing on this preliminary site plan and
delineate what type i.e. for sale, for rent, carriage house etc. [18- 32.5.6S].
10 Section 8.2.e. Affordable Housing: [action required with this preliminary site plan] This
proffer needs to be addressed with this preliminary site plan. Please show the required three
affordable housing units. This will be part of a running total that must be shown on all submitted
preliminary and final site plans. [18- 32.5.6S].
IV. Special Use Permit Conditions for (SP- 2002 -072 North Pointe Residential Uses) have not been
addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not been addressed are:
5(a) esidential mix. The dwelling units within the Project shall consist of the following three types:
single - family detached, including carriage house units; (b) multi - family; and (c) otherVAk (consisting of townhouses, duplexes, attached housing, condominiums in the commercial areas and
any other unidentified housing types). The minimum number of each of the three dwelling unit
types shall be 205 of the 893 total permitted dwelling units. Action required with this preliminary
site plan: Please provide a running total with a breakdown of types of housing proposed and
affordable housing to be included in this preliminary site plan. [18- 32.5.6 SJ
3 Conservation areas. The conservation areas shown on the Application Plan shall remain
undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction of the County's
program authority for the Water Protection Ordinance (Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code)
the "Program Authority"); except that the pedestrian paths shown on the Application Plan may be
placed in a conservation area where shown on the Application Plan. Storm drainage outfalls and
other pedestrian paths may only be placed in conservation areas if the Program Authority finds that
no other location is reasonably available and that the disturbance is necessary for such a proposed
use. Notwithstanding the terms of this Condition 3 to the contrary, the Program Authority may
approve a utility main within a conservation area, even if it is not shown on the Application Plan,
and the Program Authority may approve other disturbances and/or measures as may be appropriate
in the Program Authority's discretion to further protect a conservation area. Action required with
this preliminary site plan: The disturbance of the conservation area must be removed from the
plan. See Engineering comment number 3.
conservation areas with Utilities. The conservation areas with utilities shown on the Application
Plan shall remain undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction
of the Program Authority; except that: (4A). The streets and pedestrian paths shown on the
Application Plan may be placed in a conservation area with utilities where shown on the
Application Plan. Other pedestrian paths, other streets, and sanitary sewers, storm drainage outfalls,
and/or stream mitigation measures may only be placed in a conservation area with utilities if the
Program Authority finds that no other location is reasonably available and the disturbance is
necessary for such a proposed use. In any event, the construction, maintenance and use of the
improvements shall have the minimum environmental impact on the conservation area with utilities
necessary for the improvements to be established and maintained, and the long -term impacts shall
be adequately mitigated. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to obviate the requirements
established for stream buffers under Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code or shall constitute a
waiver of such requirements. Action required with this preliminary site plan. The disturbance of
the conservation areas except for utilities must be removedfrom the plan. See Jonathan's
Engineering comment number 3.
6. Aggregate set aside for open -space related areas. In no event shall the total area of open -space
related areas comprised of the conservation areas (Condition 3), conservation areas with utilities
Condition 4), open space (Condition 5), greenway (Conditions 5 and 7), and landscaped buffer
areas (Conditions 5 and 8) shown on the Application Plan, be less than a total of thirty-five percent
4
O RO
C: \Geralds Docs \SDP\North Pointe\North Pointe Post -SRC Denial (4) JBS.doc
35 %) of the total land within the Project to be developed for residential uses, as shown on Sheet G
to the Application Plan entitled "Open Space and Green Way Plan," dated March 6, 2006 ( "Sheet
G "). Action required with this preliminary site plan. This special use permit condition must be
adequately addressed with this preliminary site plan and any future final site plan submittals for
this section and all sections of North Pointe. Open space areas must be identified and the total area
of open space related areas shall by no means be less than a a total of 35% of the total land within
the project to be developedfor residential uses as shown on sheet G of the Application Plan entitled
Open Space and Green Way Plan, " dated March 6, 2006 ( "Sheet G'). A running total of the
percentage of open space in relation to the total land within the Project to be developedfor
residential uses must be shown on each preliminary andfinal site plan to make sure the 35% is AW
exceeded. [18- 32.5.6S]
7C. Access easements to the Rivanna River shall be provided as shown on the Application Plan for
the benefit and use by property owners within the Project. Action required with this14--
preliminary site plan. Show all locations of access easements to the Rivanna River (if any)
on this preliminary site plan as shown on the Application Plan [18- 32.5.6S]. See
Engineering comment number 6.
VI. Vireinia Department of Transportation Comments.
Although this preliminary site plan will not be building enough units to require any of the phases
of road improvements as stated in the proffers, this plan should be in accordance with the full
build -out of the development. This preliminary plan proposes to construct a right turn lane off
northbound Route 29. Phase I road proffer 1(v) proposes to build a full 12 foot through lane from
Proffit Road to the Northwest Passage entrance. Phase III road improvement proffer 1(iii)
proposes a right turn lane on the Route 29 northbound lane at this entrance. Also, the
development plan is in accordance with the proffers. The ultimate improvements to Route 29
should be accommodated in this plan even if it only includes the grading of the future
improvements.
A traffic signal warrant analysis for Lewis and Clark has been submitted and approved by VDOT.
UVA is currently working on the signal plans. I am not sure if they plan to accommodate the
Northwest Passage entrance but it could be advantageous to coordinate with UVA.
Road and drainage plans need to be designed in accordance with VDOT Road Design Manual,
specifications, and The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways.
Any work within the VDOT right of way will require a permit.
VII. Albemarle Countv Service Authoritv Comments.
Ester,
Could you dig around in your files concerning North Pointe? We made previous comments concerning
the use of the North Fork Research Park sanitary sewer pump station. There is no capacity for sanitary
sewer pointing in that direction. The applicant will have to use the proposed North Pointe pump
station and reverse the flow as shown on the plan that we received. Also, capacity certification from
RWSA will be required. If you could make copies or scan the original comments and share them with
Gerald and myself, I would greatly appreciate it.
Gary
Q'Geralds Docs1SDPNorth P ointelNorthInaccordwith Pointe Post -SRC Denial *`
this decision2260Section 32.4.2.6 of Ch (4)1BS.doc
Please
May be appealed. apter 18 of the Albernarl Ccontactmeat my Code andinformation. Your earliest convenience iF VA Code Section 15-2-2-
Sincerely,you have any questions or require additional
Gerald Gatobu 'Zoni , Senior PlannerCurrentDevelopment
File: SDP - 200700087
6
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
03 April 2009
Comments from Elaine Echols, Principal Planner, Planning Division
1. Portions of the site plan are not in conformiri with the approved application plan of ZMA-
aN ^ 2000 -9• however you have requested three variations which are described in the attached
y letter from Wayne Cilimberg. Once these items have been satisfactorilv addressed and a
variation is granted, this comment will be addressed.
v-
Enaineerina Comments from Glenn Brooks dated April 7` 2009 (County Engineer). Comments
refer to the plan dated March 10` 2009. Those items that need to be addressed are
Engineering does not recommend approval of the preliminary site plan. Issues raised in previous
comments have not been adequately addressed.
The stormwater management concepts need to be revised to correspond better with the
application plan. The BMP's below the development must be provided. The basin on the uphill
side of the development does not appear adequate to serve the school property and this one. This
facility should be more than a large hole at the end of a steep slope behind buildings. It should
have good access, and sufficient area for wetland and forebay features. Please provide more area,
better access, and specify the state standard for the type of facility and enough data to ensure it
will adequately cover the future school site.
2. The preliminary site plan does not adequately show the proffered improvements for the roadways.
The note to show this on other plans before approval does not appear feasible.
It does not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on conservation areas and
floodplain for erosion and sediment control measures. This does not appear to be the intention of
the rezoning and proffers.
Previous Engineering Comments
Engineering recommends denial to the preliminary site plan. Before Engineering can recommend
approval to the preliminary site plan, the following comments must be addressed. Several comments have
been intentionally omitted as the Engineering comments are referenced in other staff comments /proffer or
condition comments.
1. The preliminary plan is not in conformance with the application plan. In order to achieve the
layout proposed, a rezoning is required. [Per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c]
2. Work in the floodplain is only permitted in areas approved per the application plan and special
use permit concept plans. Please remove all work in the floodplain (other than grading for
Northwest Passage or exempt utilities). Storm pipes are shown north of proposed SIAM facility
11 in the floodplain.itve structures oulsluc .
s disturbance is not exempt. Please remo
t.,.
floodplain. [per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c, 18-30.3.3.21
line is incorrectly shown. The eastern conservation
cal slopes are bei
begins
disturbed
The eastern conservation ortion of c
top of the slope where critical slopes begin. A large Please remove all work
adinglretaining walls/buildi
rs proposed layout may harm trees in ainstbproposedwork/gr ears the p ;t,eering recommends ag
outside of the eastern conservation area. It apedretaining walls. Eng ading layout
adjacent to conservation areas. The proposed grconservationareasdirectlyadjacenttopropwallsdirectlyadjli. It appears that thetheuseofretainingacedtotheappcationplani . while the
I
mind,
shows a significant increase in earthwork ed with the existing topography . e cut and fillintheapplicationplanwasdesignadinbplanshowsanextravagantamountofearthwork, including largeproposedgradingpelow. [per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c]areas and the use of tall retaining walls. See diagr ams b
conservation
Area (wooded)
Existing Topo
Proposed-Topo
Conservation
Area (wooded)
n Example Cross - Section (not to scale)A Pla
le Cross - Section (not to scale) Proposed facilities
Proposed Plan Example is #10 -12) are inadequ
4 • The proposed
faciliteate. None of the
proposeroosedWetPonds (SWM um 10 acre drainage area).
have an adequate base flow for a wet pond (minim
ublished by the Center for
padequateSWMfaci The facilities must capture 80% of total suspended solids, as descri
of Watershed Protection (2000 ' P . •
es r
quate deten requiremen
forInfiltrationpracticessuchasabiorentionbsilrterec
eg
a
uirere fforor
ed
ebays yslterinArticle64ofthePrac
Watershed Protection. In
char e
as proposed, the stormwater facilities
that provides adets. All Water
into the facility. Also,
Qua t y
11 is a concern. [per ZMAeachpointofconcentrateddgosedwallinsideSWMfacility #
are shown short- circuiting. The prop V SMH 3.0 6]vements for the proposedandSp, 17- 312 -C, 315 B,C,18- 32.5.6k,17 -303,
5. The preliminary site plan fails
a
adequ
pla a proffers iproffered
ro
accordance with p reliminary site plan
residentialphapertheapplication 2
conservation
Area (wooded)
Area
Of
Fill
le Cross - Section (not to scale) Proposed facilities
Proposed Plan Example is #10 -12) are inadequ
4 • The proposed
faciliteate. None of the
proposeroosedWetPonds (SWM um 10 acre drainage area).
have an adequate base flow for a wet pond (minim
ublished by the Center for
padequateSWMfaciThe facilities must capture 80% of total suspended solids, as descri
of Watershed Protection (2000 ' P . •
es r
quate deten requiremen
forInfiltrationpracticessuchasabiorentionbsilrterec
eg
a
uirere f foror
ed
ebays yslterinArticle64ofthePrac
Watershed Protection. In
char e
as proposed, the stormwater facilities
that provides adets. All Water
into the facility. Also,
Qua t y
11 is a concern. [per ZMAeachpointofconcentrateddgosedwallinsideSWMfacility #
are shown short- circuiting. The prop V SMH 3.0 6]vements for the proposedandSp, 17- 312 -C, 315 B,C,18- 32.5.6k,17 -303,
5. The preliminary site plan fails
a
adequ
pla a proffers iproffered
ro
accordance with p reliminary site plan
residentialphapertheapplication 2
requirements. The tollowing road improvements should be shown on the preliminary plan and
must he constructed Burin__= the construction of this residential development: (Proffer 5.3.1 c 1) [18-
O.J.52a,c]
i. U.S. Route 29 Southbound - construction of left turn lane with taper.
ii. Northwest Passage from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard.
in U.S. Route 29 Northbound — construction of a right hand turn lane, geometries of which
will be subject to VDOT approval.
iv. If not already constructed, North Pointe Boulevard between Northside Drive East and
Northwest Passage.
Only the proposed layout of the required improvements has been shown. Please cling all rennirerliUE
information per 15- 32.5.6, including: proposed grading (d), proposed street cross - sections in
accordance with the application plan (i), proposed layout of drainage pipes, channels, stormwater
management facilities, drainage easements, etc. (k).
6. [intentionally omitted]
7. [intentionally omitted]
8. [intentionally omitted]
9. The proposed road cross - sections for Northwest Passage are inadequate as they do not match the
application plan. Please see cross - sections NWP1 -3 on the application plan.
Site Plan requirements that have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those
items that have not been addressed are:
32.7.2.8] Sidewalks: Provision shall be made for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways which will
enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and from the site
to adjacent property. The sidewalks along Northwest Passage end before they get to State Route
29. Sidewalks must extend to State Route 29. Additionally, please provide a network of sidewalks
that will enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and
from the site to the proposed trails and adjacent properties. Provision shall be made where
appropriate for pedestrian walkways in relation to private and public areas of recreation and open
space such as schools, parks, gardens and areas of similar nature.
32.5.6.i] Existing and proposed streets, access easements, alley easements and rights -of -way, and
travelways, together with street names, state route numbers, right -of -way lines and widths,
centerline radii, and pavement widths. Please show the existing private access easement to the
Korean Church.
32.5.6.r] Setbacks shown on the site plan by the trail are incorrect. Please make sure the 10'foot
rear setback and the 6' setbacks are shown correctly. Additionally, some buildings shown on the
site plan are in the 8' foot front setback. Please revise.
Proffers have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not been
addressed are:
1. Section 4.1 Flood Plain: compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan and
future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle County Engineering Review.
See Engineering comment number 3 for guidance.
2. Section 4.2 Storm Rater Management Plan Compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle
County Engineering Review. Sec Engineering catmrent number 1 for guidance.
3. Section 5.1 Internal street construction standards compliance: [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. All proffered transportation
improvements must be shown on the preliminary plan. See Engineering connnew number 2ftn'
guidance.
4. Section 5.3.1.c Phase III Road Improvements compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan].Approval of a subdivision plat or site plan for any development of either
the Virginia Land Trust Company (32 -22K) or the Jackson Trust Property (32 -22H) or any
portion thereof triggers this proffer. Sec Engineering comment number2_for guidance.
Section 5.3.1.0.1. Northernmost Entrance (opposite Lewis andrl. ark Drive) on U.S. Route
29 compliance: [Highly important action required with this preliminary site plan and at
final site plan submittal) this proffer applies to this preliminary site plan. Please provide
conceptual road plans addressing all Road improvements for the Northernmost Entrance on 29
opposite Lewis & Clark Drive). See section i -v of the proffers for specific improvements. i) U.S.
route 29 Southbound will require construction of a left turn lane with taper (ii) Northwest Passage
from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard will have to be constructed /addressed with this
preliminary and final site plan (iii) U.S. Route 29 Northbound - construction of a right hand turn
lane, the geometries of which will be subject to VDOT approval, and (iv) If not already
constructed North Pointe Boulevard between North side Drive East and Northwest Passage and
v) Traffic signal construction subject to signal timing plan and approval by VDOT. Road
improvements proffered for phase III (5.3.1.0.) must be shown on the preliminary site plan.
Detailed plans and computations will be required at final site plan. See Engineering comment
nuniher ?, for giridarrcc.
Special Use Permit Conditions for (SP -2002 -072 North Pointe Residential Uses) have not been
addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not been addressed are:
1. Conservation areas. The conservation areas shown on the Application Plan shall remain
undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction of the County's
program authority for the Water Protection Ordinance (Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code)
the "Program Authority"); except that the pedestrian paths shown on the Application Plan may be
placed in a conservation area where shown on the Application Plan. Storm drainage outfalls and
other pedestrian paths may only be placed in conservation areas if the Program Authority finds that
no other location is reasonably available and that the disturbance is necessary for such a proposed
use. Notwithstanding the terms of this Condition 3 to the contrary, the Program Authority may
approve a utility main within a conservation area, even if it is not shown on the Application Plan,
and the Program Authority may approve other disturbances and /or measures as may be appropriate
in the Program Authority's discretion to further protect a conservation area. Action required with
this prelintinart site plan: It does not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on
conservation m eas and floodplain _ for erosion and sediment control measures. See Glenn Brooks
Engineering comment number 3.
Conservation areas with Utilities. The conservation areas with utilities shown on the Application
Plan shall remain undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction
of the Program Authority; except that: (4A). The streets and pedestrian paths shown on the
Application Plan may be placed in a conservation area with utilities where shown on the
Application Plan. Other pedestrian paths, other streets, and sanitary sewers, storm drainage outfalls,
and /or stream mitigation measures may only be placed in a conservation area with utilities if the
Program Authority finds that no other location is reasonably available and the disturbance is
necessary for such a proposed use. In any event, the construction, maintenance and use of the
improvements shall have the minimum environmental impact on the conservation area with utilities
necessary for the improvements to be established and maintained, and the long -term impacts shall
be adequately mitigated. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to obviate the requirements
established for stream buffers under Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code or shall constitute a
waiver of such requirements. Action required with this prelinzittar1 site plan. It does not appear
possible to build this site without encroaching on conservation areas and floodplain for erosion
and sediment control measures. See Glenn Brooks Engineering comment number 3.
4
Albemarle County Service Authoritv Comments from Gary Whelan (En <(ineer, Albemarle Count
Service Authoritv).
See altached comment letter irons Mary Wlielan dated April 1 ) ° i 2009.
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authoritv Comments from Justin Weiler dated 4/2/2009 (Engineer,
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authoritv).
RWSA has the following comments for the preliminary plan site plan:
1. RWSA review of the final site plan will be required. As part of this review, test pits will be
required to verify the horizontal and vertical locations ofthe 12" RWSA waterline. Special
designs notes will need to be added to the plans as deemed necessary by RWSA.
2. The RWSA waterline that is currently located in Rt. 29 may need to be relocated due to the
widening of Rt. 29. Please provide RWSA with a copy of the Rt. 29 expansion plans so that we
can evaluate the impacts to our waterline and coordinate the possible relocation of our waterline
with VDOT.
3. If the anticipated average daily wastewater flows from this development exceeds 40,000 gallons
per day then. per DEQ, a flow acceptance review is required. ACSA should submit a flow
acceptance request to RWSA to initiate the review.
4. Please note that the water system that will serve the proposed development currently operates at a
hydraulic grade line of approximately 805' above sea level. but in the future the system will
operate at an HGL of 652' above sea level. Please use an HGL of 652' for sizing all waterlines in
the development, and provide hydraulic calculations for review.
Comments from Joel Denunzio dated 4/3/2009 (Vir -i Department of Transportation).
The Charlottesville Residency Staff reviewed the above referenced Preliminary Site Plan dated 3 -09 -09
and the following comments need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval of the plan:
1. In accordance with the requirements of 24 VAC 30 -91 -60 the proposed roads within the entire North
Pointe Subdivision need to be submitted for VDOT to concur with the proposed functional classification
and layout proposed for each street within the subdivision.
2. The data included in the plan needs to meet the requirements of the above mentioned code. No review
of road plans can occur prior to VDOT approving the functional classification of the roads within the
development.
3. Intersection layouts, typical sections, utility placements, geometric standards and any other design
items shown in the preliminary plan may need adjustment upon review of the construction plan. All
design needs to be in accordance with the VDOT Road Design Manual and Drainage Manual.
4. Plans for improvements to Route 29 should be submitted prior to any site plan approvals to avoid
conflicts. Items such as intersection layout, auxiliary lanes, and utility placements on the Route 29
corridor will need to be addressed with the plans.
The items of the first comment need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval of the
preliminary plan. Please submit a comment response letter that indicates any changes to the plan in the
next submission.
Comments from Margaret Maliszewski dated 03/24/09 (Principal Planner AR-B).
This site falls within the Route 29 Entrance Corridor. Consequently, ARB review and approval are
required prior to final site plan approval. ARB applications, checklists, guidelines and schedules are
available on line at www.albemarle.org
Please contact me at your earfest convenience at 434 -296 -5832 ext 338 if Inu have anv questions or
require additional infonnation.
Sincerely,
Gerald Gatob Principal Planner
Albemarle County,
Zoning &: Current Development.
Service Auth6rit
TO: Gerald Gatobu
FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer
DATE: April 9, 2009
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for:North Pointe Northwest Residential Area
SDP200800041
TM 32 -22K & 22H
The below checked items apply to this site.
X 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for:
X A. Water and sewer
B. Water only
C. Water only to existing structure
D. Limited service
X 2.A 12 inch water line is located approximately 50' distant.
X 3.Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located 300' distant from this site plan,
is 3,000 Gpm + at 20 psi residual.
X 4.An 8 inch sewer line is located approximately 300' distant.
5.An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed.
X 6.No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future
easements.
7.and plans are currently under review.
8.and plans have been received and approved.
9.No plans are required.
X 10.Final water and sewer plans are required for our review and approval
prior to granting tentative approval.
11.Final site plan may /may not be signed.
X 12.RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections.
13.City of Charlottesville approval for sewer.
Comments: Show connection to North Pointe Regional Pump Station. Projected
flow of 50,220 gpd will require RWSA capacity certification.
The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows:
meter locations water line size
waterline locations sewer line size
sewer line locations expected wastewater flows
easements expected water demands
168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698
www.serviceauthoriy.org
EJ
RGt SN
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
03 April 2009
The site elan is not in conformity with the annroved apDlication Dlan of ZMA- 2000 -9 for the
following reasons. This deficiency may be addressed by revising the site plan, seeking a variation
from the annroved at)Dlication Dlan in accord with section 18- 8.5.5.3. or amending the apDlication
plan through a rezoning of the property. I do not see that any changes have been made to the previous
site plan SDP 2007 -87. Comments on this site plan are the same as on SDP 2007 -87 and are provided
below: (Comments from Elaine Echols)
1. The eastern conservation area begins at the top of the slope where critical slopes begin. Buildings
and parking areas are shown in the conservation area. Buildings and parking cannot be shown or
placed in a conservation area. This item cannot be varied.
2. The conservation line near the northern floodplain crossing is shown incorrectly causing the
appearance of disturbance. If the western conservation line were correctly shown, there would
not be disturbance in that area shown on the plan. This item should be corrected.
3. In this same area, an access easement to the Korean Church parcel is shown as providing public
access to the greenway. This item could be varied; however, it would be dependent on how the
access easement language is written between the Church and the owner.
4. More building area is shown west of Northwest Passage than was shown on the application plan.
Where a single row of buildings was shown west of Northwest Passage, there are now three rows
of buildings. Where driveways were shown on the application plan, there are buildings shown on
the site plan. This greater intensity results in less area for stormwater management. Less area for
stormwater management is causing steep slopes and retaining walls over 10 feet in height close to
residential buildings. This item could be varied; however, it is very unlikely that the Planning
Director would grant a variation because of the negative effects of the steep slopes, tall retaining
walls, and location of the retaining walls.
5. Buildings and parking are shown on the site plan in an area adjacent to SWM Facility #10 where
the application plan shows no development. Four buildings in this area also cause stormwater
facilities to have steep slopes and retaining walls. This item could be varied; however, it is very
unlikely that the Planning Director would grant a variation because of the negative effects of the
steep slopes and location of the retaining walls close to the residential units.
Unit orientation is different than shown on the application plan in several places. On the western
side of Northwest Passage units were not shown along the street resulting in approval of a street
section in the rezoning that did not include a sidewalk. This item could be varied which might be
successful because it creates a better street face. If it is varied, the street section would need to
include sidewalks and street trees on both sides of Northwest Passage where street trees are
between the back of the curb and the sidewalk.
Engineering does not recommend approval of the preliminary site plan. Issues raised in previous
comments have not been adequately addressed.
The stormwater management concepts need to be revised to correspond better with the
application plan. The BMP "s below the development must be provided. The basin on the uphill
side of the development does not appear adequate to serve the school property and this one. This
facility should be more than a large hole at the end of a steep slope behind buildings. It should
have good access, and sufficient area for wetland and forebay features. Please provide more area,
better access, and specify the state standard for the type of facility and enough data to ensure it
will adequately cover the future school site.
2. The preliminary site plan does not adequately show the proffered improvements for the roadways.
The note to show this on other plans before approval does not appear feasible.
3. It does not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on conservation areas and
floodplain for erosion and sediment control measures. This does not appear to be the intention of
the rezoning and proffers.
Previous En2ineerin2 Comments
Engineering recommends denial to the preliminary site plan. Before Engineering can recommend
approval to the preliminary site plan, the following comments must be addressed. Several comments have
been intentionally omitted as the Engineering comments are referenced in other staff comments /proffer or
condition comments.
The preliminary plan is not in conformance with the application plan. In order to achieve the
layout proposed, a rezoning is required. [Per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c]
Work in the floodplain is only permitted in areas approved per the application plan and special
use permit concept plans. Please remove all work in the floodplain (other than grading for
Northwest Passage or exempt utilities). Storm pipes are shown north of proposed SWM facility
11 in the floodplain. This disturbance is not exempt. Please remove the structures outside of the
floodplain. [per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c, 18- 30.3.3.2]
The eastern conservation line is incorrectly shown. The eastern conservation area begins at the
top of the slope where critical slopes begin. A large portion of critical slopes are being disturbed
by proposed work/grading /retaining walls /buildings /travelways /etc. Please remove all work
outside of the eastern conservation area. It appears the proposed layout may harm trees in
conservation areas directly adjacent to proposed retaining walls. Engineering recommends against
the use of retaining walls directly adjacent to conservation areas. The proposed grading layout
shows a significant increase in earthwork compared to the application plan. It appears that the
grading in the application plan was designed with the existing topography in mind, while the
proposed grading plan shows an extravagant amount of earthwork, including large cut and fill
areas and the use of tall retaining walls. See diagrams below. [per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c]
C
Area (wooded)Area of
existing Tapp
Proposed Topo
conservatio
Area (wooded)
Application Yian C aa• i`N"
Conservation
Area (wood
Proposed Tt'>po
conservatio
Area (wooded)
El
not to scale) ro osed facilities
proposed Plan Example Cross - Section ( are inadequate. None
re
the p p
Prop SWM facilities #10 - 12) =e area). Please propose
The proposed W et Ponds ( and (minimum 10 acre drainage ended solids, as described
have an adequate base flow for a wet p
published by the Center for
adequate 5WM facilities. The facilitie ipioteo
e (0000 ed.) p
rasp
ended (biolter
in Article 64 of the Pract s foriceofWatersafireforebayrotection. Infiltration practices such
11
a aterenualitb facliter eq
W P ments. All Water Q ro osed, the stormwate er
cil s
that provides adequate detention requireroosed wall inside SWNI facility #11 is a concern. [peachpointofconcentrateddischargehargp
into the facility. Also, as p
303 VSMH 3.061 improvements for the proposedareshownshort -circuiting T19-32-5, 6k , 1? coffered impandSP, 1 1- 312 -C, 315 B. show the p relinunary site plan
reliminary licatio
site plan fails to adequately
n p
coffers in accordance with p eli dnary plan andThepertheappnplanandp'residential phase p n road improvements should be shown on the p p 5.3 .1 cl) [1-
requirements. The following
must be constructed during the construction of this residential development:
8
n
8 construction of left turn lane with taper.
i. U USS. Route') Southbound — geometries of which
we from .. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard-
ii. Northwest Pass = constructon of a right hand turn lane, U.S. Route 29 N — royal.
will be subject to VDOT aNorth Pointe Boulevard between Northside Drive East and
iv. if not already constructed,
Northwest Passage. red improvements has been shov Please
cross sectiolnsinufired
ro osed layout of the requl ro osed grading (d), proposed s stormwater
Only the p p X 5 6 including p p 6 i es, channels
infonnation per 18 -32. n (i), proposed layout of drainage p paccordancewiththeapplicationplamanagementfacilities, drainage easements etc (k)3
existing Topo
6. [intentionally omitted]
7. [intentionally omitted]
8. [intentionally omitted]
9. The proposed road cross - sections for Northwest Passage are inadequate as they do not match the
application plan. Please see cross - sections NWP1 -3 on the application plan.
Site Plan requirements that have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those
items that have not been addressed are:
32.7.2.8] Sidewalks: Provision shall be made for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways which will
enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and from the site
to adjacent property. The sidewalks along Northwest Passage end before they get to State Route
29. Sidewalks must extend to State Route 29. Additionally, please provide a network of sidewalks
that will enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and
from the site to the proposed trails and adjacent properties. Provision shall be made where
appropriate for pedestrian walkways in relation to private and public areas of recreation and open
space such as schools, parks, gardens and areas of similar nature.
32.5.6.i] Existing and proposed streets, access easements, alley easements and rights -of -way, and
travelways, together with street names, state route numbers, right -of -way lines and widths,
centerline radii, and pavement widths. Please show the existing private access easement to the
Korean Church.
32.5.6.r] Setbacks shown on the site plan by the trail are incorrect. Please make sure the 10'foot
rear setback and the 6' setbacks are shown correctly. Additionally, some buildings shown on the
site plan are in the 8' foot front setback. Please revise.
III. Proffers have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not
been addressed are:
1. Section 4.1 Flood Plain: compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan and
future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle County Engineering Review.
See Engineering comment number 3 guidance.
2. Section 4.2 Storm Water Management Plan Compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle
County Engineering Review. See Engineering comment number 1, for guidance.
3. Section 5.1 Internal street construction standards compliance: [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. All proffered transportation
improvements must be shown on the preliminary plan. See Engineering comment number 2 for
guidance.
4. Section 5.3.1.c Phase III Road Improvements compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan].Approval of a subdivision plat or site plan for any development of either
the Virginia Land Trust Company (32 -22K) or the Jackson Trust Property (32 -22H) or any
portion thereof triggers this proffer. See Engineering comment nuniber2, for guidance.
5. Section 5.3.1.C.1. Northernmost Entrance (opposite Lewis and Clark Drive) on U.S. Route
29 compliance: [Highly important action required with this preliminary site plan and at
final site plan submittal] this proffer applies to this preliminary site plan. Please provide
conceptual road plans addressing all Road improvements for the Northernmost Entrance on 29
opposite Lewis & Clark Drive). See section i -v of the proffers for specific improvements. i) U.S.
route 29 Southbound will require construction of a left turn lane with taper (ii) Northwest Passage
from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard will have to be constructed/addressed with this
preliminary and final site plan (iii) U.S. Route 29 Northbound - construction of a right hand turn
lane, the geometries of which will be subject to VDOT approval, and (iv) If not already
constructed North Pointe Boulevard between North side Drive East and Northwest Passage and
v) Traffic signal construction subject to signal timing plan and approval by VDOT. Road
improvements proffered for phase III (5.3.1.C.) must be shown on the preliminary site plan.
Detailed plans and computations will be required at final site plan. See Engineel•illg comment
number 2 /o)r allldance.
IN'. Special Use Permit Conditions for (SP- 2002 -072 North Pointe Residential Uses) have not been
addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not been addressed are:
1. Conservation areas. The conservation areas shown on the Application Plan shall remain
undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction of the County's
program authority for the Water Protection Ordinance (Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code)
the "Program Authority "), except that the pedestrian paths shown on the Application Plan may be
placed in a conservation area where shown on the Application Plan. Storm drainage outfalls and
other pedestrian paths may only be placed in conservation areas if the Program Authority finds that
no other location is reasonably available and that the disturbance is necessary for such a proposed
use. Notwithstanding the terms of this Condition 3 to the contrary, the Program Authority may
approve a utility main within a conservation area, even if it is not shown on the Application Plan,
and the Program Authority may approve other disturbances and /or measures as may be appropriate
in the Program Authority's discretion to further protect a conservation area. Action required with
this prelinzirrazy site plan: It sloes not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on
conservation areas and, floodplain, for erosion and sediment control measures. See Glenn Brooks
Engineering comment number 3.
Conservation areas with Utilities. The conservation areas with utilities shown on the Application
Plan shall remain undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction
of the Program Authority; except that: (4A). The streets and pedestrian paths shown on the
Application Plan may be placed in a conservation area with utilities where shown on the
Application Plan. Other pedestrian paths, other streets, and sanitary sewers, storm drainage outfalls,
and /or stream mitigation measures may only be placed in a conservation area with utilities if the
Program Authority finds that no other location is reasonably available and the disturbance is
necessary for such a proposed use. In any event, the construction, maintenance and use of the
improvements shall have the minimum environmental impact on the conservation area with utilities
necessary for the improvements to be established and maintained, and the long -term impacts shall
be adequately mitigated. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to obviate the requirements
established for stream buffers under Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code or shall constitute a
waiver of such requirements. Action required with this prelinzinaz y site plan. It does not appear
possible to build this site without encroaching on conscrv areas and floodplain for erosion
and sediment control measures. See Glenn Brooks Engineering comment number 3.
VI Albemarle Countv Service Authoritv Comments from Gary Whelan (Engineer, Albemarle
Countv Service Authoritv).
Gerald,
The applicant's response to comment 13 was to direct gravity sewer to a future regional pump station to
be located by the ACSA. The ACSA is waiting on a preliminary engineering report from our
consulting engineer and reserves comment until that report has been reviewed.
Gary
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authoritv Comments from Justin Weiler dated 4/2/2009 (Engineer,
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority).
RWSA has the following comments for the preliminary plan site plan:
1. RWSA review of the final site plan will be required. As part of this review, test pits will be
required to verify the horizontal and vertical locations of the 12'' RWSA waterline. Special
design notes will need to be added to the plans as deemed necessary by RWSA.
2. The RWSA waterline that is currently located in Rt. 29 may need to be relocated due to the
widening of Rt. 29. Please provide RWSA with a copy of the Rt. 29 expansion plans so that we
can evaluate the impacts to our waterline and coordinate the possible relocation of our waterline
with VDOT.
3. If the anticipated average daily wastewater flows from this development exceeds 40,000 gallons
per day then, per DEQ, a flow acceptance review is required. ACSA should submit a flow
acceptance request to RWSA to initiate the review.
4. Please note that the water system that will serve the proposed development currently operates at a
hydraulic grade line of approximately 805' above sea level, but in the future the system will
operate at an HGL of 652' above sea level. Please use an HGL of 652' for sizing all waterlines in
the development, and provide hydraulic calculations for review.
VIII Comments from Joel Denunzio dated 4/3/2009 (Virginia Department of Transportation).
The Charlottesville Residency Staff reviewed the above referenced Preliminary Site Plan dated 3 -09 -09
and the following comments need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval of the plan:
1. In accordance with the requirements of 24 VAC 30 -91 -60 the proposed roads within the entire North
Pointe Subdivision need to be submitted for VDOT to concur with the proposed functional classification
and layout proposed for each street within the subdivision.
2. The data included in the plan needs to meet the requirements of the above mentioned code. No review
of road plans can occur prior to VDOT approving the functional classification of the roads within the
development.
3. Intersection layouts, typical sections, utility placements, geometric standards and any other design
items shown in the preliminary plan may need adjustment upon review of the construction plan. All
design needs to be in accordance with the VDOT Road Design Manual and Drainage Manual.
4. Plans for improvements to Route 29 should be submitted prior to any site plan approvals to avoid
conflicts. Items such as intersection layout, auxiliary lanes, and utility placements on the Route 29
corridor will need to be addressed with the plans.
The items of the first comment need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval of the
preliminary plan. Please submit a comment response letter that indicates any changes to the plan in the
next submission.
IX Comments from Margaret Maliszewski dated 03/24/09 (Principal Planner ARB).
This site falls within the Route 29 Entrance Corridor. Consequently, ARB review and approval are
required prior to final site plan approval. ARB applications, checklists, guidelines and schedules are
available on line at www.albemarle.or( = .
Please contact me at your earliest convenience at 434 - 296 -832 ext 3385 if you have any questions or
require additional information.
Sincerely,
Gerald Gatobu, Principal Planner
Albemarle County,
Zoning & Current Development.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
03 April 2009
Comments from Elaine Echols, Principal Planner, Planning Division
1. Portions of the site plan are not in conformity with the approved application plan of ZMA-
2000-9• however you have requested three variations which are described in the attached
letter from Wayne Cilimbera. Once these items have been satisfactorilv addressed and a
variation is granted, this comment will be addressed.
refer to
Engineering does not recommend approval of the preliminary site plan. Issues raised in previous
comments have not been adequately addressed.
The stormwater management concepts need to be revised to correspond better with the
application plan. The BMP's below the development must be provided. The basin on the uphill
side of the development does not appear adequate to serve the school property and this one. This
facility should be more than a large hole at the end of a steep slope behind buildings. It should
have good access, and sufficient area for wetland and forebay features. Please provide more area,
better access, and specify the state standard for the type of facility and enough data to ensure it
will adequately cover the future school site.
2. The preliminary site plan does not adequately show the proffered improvements for the roadways.
The note to show this on other plans before approval does not appear feasible.
3. It does not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on conservation areas and
floodplain for erosion and sediment control measures. This does not appear to be the intention of
the rezoning and proffers.
Previous Engineering Comments
Engineering recommends denial to the preliminary site plan. Before Engineering can recommend
approval to the preliminary site plan, the following comments must be addressed. Several comments have
been intentionally omitted as the Engineering comments are referenced in other staff comments /proffer or
condition comments.
1. The preliminary plan is not in conformance with the application plan. In order to achieve the
layout proposed, a rezoning is required. [Per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c]
2. Work in the floodplain is only permitted in areas approved per the application plan and special
use permit concept plans. Please remove all work in the floodplam (other than grading for
Northwest Passage or exempt utilities). Storm pipes are shown north of proposed SWM facility
11 in the floodplain.This disturbance is not exempt• Please remove structures oulsiuc
floodplain. [per ZMA and SP, 18- 8.5.5.2a,c, 18- 30.3.3.2]
es are being disturbedlineisincorrectlyShown* The eastern conse area begins at the
The eastern conservation calportionofc
top of the slope where critical slopes, A large p
harm trees inretainingwallsibuildings /travelways /etc. Please remove all
in
b proposed work/grading - ears the proposed layout may
area. It app recommends againstwalls. Engineeringoutsideoftheeasternconservscenttoproposedretainingroosed grading layout
conservation areas directly J
h The plan. It appears that theheuseofretainingwasdirectlyadjacenttoconservationareas. `te p p
nd while thetaredtotheapp -aphasignificantmcreasplan
earthwork edWwith the existing topo in
h in mi
puding large cut and filladingintheapplicationpantamountofearthwork,
plan shows an extravag diagrams below. [per ZMA and SP,
areas and the use of tall retaining
18- 8.5.5.2a,c]
proposed grading p walls. See diagr
uate. None of the proposed facilities
Proposed Plan Ex, Ondls SW-M fes #10 -12) are inadeq please propose
7 4. The proposed Wet Pon ( um 10 acre drainage area).
ate base flow for a wet pond Inure 80% of total suspended solids, as described
have an adequ
p b
T of Watershed Protection (2000 ed.) published by the Center foradequateSWMfacilities. The facilities must capture biorention basin are recommended (biofilter
in Article 64 of the
h \`
d requirements. AllWathedProtect' dfi ltration practices such as er Quality facilites require forebays forWatersosed, the stormwater facilitiesthatprovidesadeqasproerZMA
Point of concentrated discharge into the facility. Also, p p
each p proposed wall inside SWM facility #11 is a concern. [p
port- circuiting. The prop VSMH 3 06j sedareshownsimprovementsfortheprop
and SP, 17- 312 -C, eliminary
o
315 B,C, 18 -32.5 6uately show the proffered imp site plan
5 tiThepreliminarysiteplanfailsto on p lan and proffers in accordance with prresidentialphasepertheapplicaonp2
requirements. The following road improvements should be shown on the preliminary plan and
must be constructed during the construction of this residential development: (Proffer 5.3.1 cl) [18-
8.5.5.2a,c]
i. U.S. Route 29 Southbound — construction of left turn lane with taper.
ii. Northwest Passage from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard.
iii. U.S. Route 29 Northbound — construction of a right hand turn lane, geometries of which
will be subject to VDOT approval.
iv. If not already constructed, North Pointe Boulevard between Northside Drive East and
Northwest Passage.
Only the proposed layout of the required improvements has been shown. Please show all required
information per 18- 32.5.6, including: proposed grading (d), proposed'street cross - sections in
accordance with the application plan (i), proposed layout of drainage pipes, channels, stormwater
management facilities, drainage easements, etc. (k).
m en ions lyowed]
9= the proposed - road cross -sect rons Passage; are -inadequatf n.they.do_noLmatch the
application plan. Please see cross- sections NWP1 -3 -on the application plan.
Site Plan requirements that have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those
items that have not been addressed are:
32.7.2.8] Sidewalks: Provision shall be made for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways which will
enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and from the site
to adjacent property. The sidewalks along Northwest Passage end before they get to State Route
29. Sidewalks must extend to State Route 29. Additionally, please provide a network of sidewalks
that will enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and
from the site to the proposed trails and adjacent properties. Provision shall be made where
appropriate for pedestrian walkways in relation to private and public areas of recreation and open
space such as schools, parks, gardens and areas of similar nature.
32.5.6.i] Existing and proposed streets, access easements, alley easements and rights -of -way, and
travelways, together with street names, state route numbers, right -of -way lines and widths,
centerline radii, and pavement widths. Please show the existing private access easement to the
Korean Church.
32.5.6.r] Setbacks shown on the site plan by the trail are incorrect. Please make sure the 10'foot
rear setback and the 6' setbacks are shown correctly. Additionally, some buildings shown on the
site plan are in the 8' foot front setback. Please revise.
Proffers have not been addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not been
addressed are:
1. Section 4.1 Flood Plain: compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan and
future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle County Engineering Review.
See Engineering comment number 3 fog° guidance.
2. Section 4.2 Storm Water Management Plan Compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle
County Engineering Review. See Engineering comment number 1 for guidance.
3. Section 5.1 Internal street construction standards compliance: [Action required with this
preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. All proffered transportation
improvements must be shown on the preliminary plan. See Engineering comment number 2 for
guidance.
4. Section 5.3.1.c Phase III Road Improvements compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan].Approval of a subdivision plat or site plan for any development of either
the Virginia Land Trust Company (32 -22K) or the Jackson Trust Property (32 -22H) or any
portion thereof triggers this proffer. See Engineering comment number2 for guidance.
Section 5.3.1.('.1. Northernmost Entrance (opposite Lewis and Crark Drive) on U.S. Route
29 compliance: [Highly important action required with this preliminary site plan and at
final site plan, submittal] this proffer applies to this preliminary site plan. Please provide
conceptual road plans addressing all Road improvements for the Northernmost Entrance on 29
opposite Lewis & Clark Drive). See section 1 -v of the proffers for specific improvements. i) U.S.
route 29 Southbound will require construction of a left turn lane with taper (ii) Northwest Passage
from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard will have to be constructed/addressed with this
preliminary and final site plan (iii) U.S. Route 29 Northbound - construction of a right hand turn
lane, the geometries of which will be subject to VDOT approval, and (iv) If not already
cons North1, Pointe Boulevard between North side Thrive Fast and Northwest Passage and
v) Traffic signal construction subject to signal timing plan and approval by VDOT. Road
improvements proffered for phase III (53.1.C.) must be shown on the preliminary site plan.
Detailed plans and computations will be required at final site plan. See Engineering comment
numher 2_forguidance.
Special Use Permit Conditions for (SP -2002 -072 North Pointe Residential Uses) have not been
addressed (Comments from Gerald Gatobu). Those items that have not been addressed are:
1. Conservation areas. The conservation areas shown on the Application Plan shall remain
undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction of the County's
program authority for the Water Protection Ordinance (Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code)
the "Program Authority"); except that the pedestrian paths shown on the Application Plan may be
placed in a conservation area where shown on the Application Plan. Storm drainage outfalls and
other pedestrian paths may only be placed in conservation areas if the Program Authority finds that
no other location is reasonably available and that the disturbance is necessary for such a proposed
use. Notwithstanding the terms of this Condition 3 to the contrary, the Program Authority may
approve a utility main within a conservation area, even if it is not shown on the Application Plan,
and the Program Authority may approve other disturbances and /or measures as may be appropriate
in the Program Authority's discretion to further protect a conservation area. Action required with
this preliminarh site plan: It does not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on
conservation areas and,floodplain_for erosion and sediment control measures. See Glenn Brooks
Engineering comment number 3.
Conservation areas with Utilities. The conservation areas with utilities shown on the Application
Plan shall remain undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction
of the Program Authority; except that: (4A). The streets and pedestrian paths shown on the
Application Plan may be placed in a conservation area with utilities where shown on the
Application Plan. Other pedestrian paths, other streets, and sanitary sewers, storm drainage outfalls,
and /or stream mitigation measures may only be placed in a conservation area with utilities if the
Program Authority finds that no other location is reasonably available and the disturbance is
necessary for such a proposed use. In any event, the construction, maintenance and use of the
improvements shall have the minimum enviromnental impact on the conservation area with utilities
necessary for the improvements to be established and maintained, and the long -term impacts shall
be adequately mitigated. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to obviate the requirements
established for stream buffers under Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code or shall constitute a
waiver of such requirements. Action required with this prelinzinan site plan. 11 does not appear
possible to build this site without encroaching on conservation areas and floodplain fcnr erosion
and sediment control measures. Sec Glenn Brooks Engineering continent munhcr 3.
Albemarle County Service Authoritv Comments from Gary Whelan (1Ln2ineer Albemarle County
Service Authoritv).
See attached comment letter irons Gar. Wlielan dated April 9' 2009
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authoritv Comments from Justin Weiler dated 4/2/2009 (En(_
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authoritv).
RWSA has the following comments for the preliminary plan site plan:
1. RWSA review of the final site plan will be required. As part of this review, test pits will be
required to verify the horizontal and vertical locations of the 12" RWSA waterline. Special
design notes will need to be added to the plans as deemed necessary by RWSA.
2. The RWSA waterline that is currently located in Rt. 29 may need to be relocated due to the
widening of Rt. 29. Please provide RWSA with a copy of the Rt. 29 expansion plans so that we
can evaluate the impacts to our waterline and coordinate the possible relocation of' our waterline
with VDOT.
3. If the anticipated average daily wastewater flows from this development exceeds 40,000 gallons
per day then, per DEQ, a flow acceptance review is required. ACSA should submit a flow
acceptance request to RWSA to initiate the review.
4. Please note that the water system that will serve the proposed development currently operates at a
hvdraulic grade line of approximately 805' above sea level. but in the future the system will
operate at an HGL of 652' above sea level. Please use an HGL of 652' for sizing all waterlines in
the development, and provide hydraulic calculations for review.
Comments from Joel Denunzio dated 4/3/2009 (Virginia Department of Transportation).
The Charlottesville Residency Staff reviewed the above referenced Preliminary Site Plan dated 3 -09 -09
and the following comments need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval of the plan:
1. In accordance with the requirements of 24 VAC 30 -91 -60 the proposed roads within the entire North
Pointe Subdivision need to be submitted for VDOT to concur with the proposed functional classification
and layout proposed for each street within the subdivision.
2. The data included in the plan needs to meet the requirements of the above mentioned code. No review
of road plans can occur prior to VDOT approving the functional classification of the roads within the
development.
3. Intersection layouts, typical sections, utility placements, geometric standards and any other design
items shown in the preliminary plan may need adjustment upon review of the construction plan. All
design needs to be in accordance with the VDOT Road Design Manual and Drainage Manual.
4. Plans for improvements to Route 29 should be submitted prior to any site plan approvals to avoid
conflicts. Items such as intersection layout, auxiliary lanes, and utility placements on the Route 29
corridor will need to be addressed with the plans.
The items of the first comment need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval of the
preliminary plan. Please submit a cornment response letter that indicates any changes to the plan in the
next submission.
Comments from Margaret Maliszewski dated 03 /24/09 (Principal Planner ARB).
This site falls within the Route 29 Entrance Corridor. Consequently, ARB review and approval are
required prior to final site plan approval. ARB applications, checklists, guidelines and schedules are
available on line at www.albemarle.org
Please contact me at vour earliest convenience at 434 -296 -5832 ext 3383 11 "Mu have anv questions or
require additional information.
Sincerely,
Gerald Gatob , Principal Planner
Albemarle County,
Zoning K Current Development.
k
kGIN
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Gerald Gatobu, Current Development planning review
From: Glenn Brooks, Current Development engineering review
Date: 7 Apr 2009
Subject: North Point,Northwest Residential Area, preliminary site plan (SDP200800041)
Engineering does not recommend approval of the preliminary site plan. Issues raised in previous
comments have not been adequately addresssed.
The stormwater management concepts need to be revised to correspond better with the application
plan. The BMP's below the development must be provided. The basin on the uphill side of the
development does not appear adequate to serve the school property and this one. This facility
should be more than a large hole at the end of a steep slope behind buildings. It should have good
access, and sufficient area for wetland and forebay features. Please provide more area, better
access, and specify the state standard for the type of facility and enough data to ensure it will
adequately cover the future school site.
2. The preliminary site plan does not adequately show the proffered improvements for the roadways.
The note to show this on other plans before approval does not appear feasible.
It does not appear possible to build this site without encroaching on conservation areas and
floodplain for erosion and sediment control measures. This does not appear to be the intention of
the rezoning and proffers.
lti r
IRGINI
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
I- M01WIiI401
Richard Spurzem
Neighborhood Investments- NP,LCC
PO Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Re: Variation request dated March 9, 2009 accompanying Preliminary Site Plan dated March
10, 2009 for North Pointe Northwest Residential Area Preliminary Site Plan
Dear Mr. Spurzem:
Thank you for your submittal of the variation request, pages 1 — 3 attached. You have
requested three variations. The [irst is to changgthe general location, number, design, layout
and orientation of buildings and parking areas such that residential units are oriented, parallel to
Northwest Passage. The second request is for a prQval to have buildings and parking between
Northwest Passage and SWM Facility #10. Thhird bequest is to replace a section of
Northwest Passage which had sidewalks and street trees on only one side of the street with
sidewalks and street trees on both sides of the street.
The first variation request can be approved with a site plan which shows units oriented parallel
V to Northwest Passage. This approval will be conditioned on tree lawns being provided with
s trees to the back of the curb and sidewalks between the property line and the sidewalks.
This street section will - be needed on both sides of Northwest Passage across your property
where residential units abut the street.
For the second request, I am unable to make comments because, to date, there is not enough
information demonstrating appropriate design for erosion control, stormwater management and
safety. In addition, as I said in my letter of January 30, 2009, 1 need to see visual depictions of
the proposed appearance of the facility from the Entrance Corridor. In terms of slope
reconstruction, I note that you have shown 3:1 slopes on the plan, as we had previously asked.
However, according to the County Engineer, the facility cannot function as shown. (See
comments from County Engineer.)
The third request relates to putting sidewalks and street trees on both sides, of the.strQ.et.
Although I would like to approve this variation request, t - f sections shown in your Key Plan on
Sheet C -6 and your street sections on Sheet 13 do not match, so it is difficult to know exactly
what you are requesting. Both sides of the street should have section NWP 1 from the
Application Plan which shows pavement, street trees, and sidewalks.. It appears on Sheet C -6
that you are showing a section of Northwest Passage where units have walkways to a sidewalk
that abuts the street with no intervening trees between the sidewalk and the street. This is a
variation that I cannot approve. Where there are no units on either side of the street between
the first set of units and North Pointe Blvd., the section NWP2 from the Application Plan, which
shows sidewalks abutting the street, may be used.
s'
Sincerely,
V. Wayne Cilimberg ,
Director of Planning
Cc: Larry Davis
Mark Graham
Amelia McCulley
Gerald Gatobu
Jl?III' N
CO[JI\TN' OF ALBENIARLE
Department of Community Development
ni r •_ n a a n. 1?7
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
April 8, 2009
Richard Spurzem
Neighborhood Investments- NP,LCC
PO Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Re: Variation request dated March 9, 2009 accompanying SDP - 2008 -00041 North Pointe
Preliminary Site Plan dated March 10, 2009 for North Pointe Northwest Residential Area
Dear Mr. Spurzem:
Thank you for your submittal of the variation request, pages 1 — 3 attached. You have
requested three variations with the submitted site plan. The first is to change the general
location, number, design, layout and orientation of buildings and parking areas such that
residential units are oriented parallel to Northwest Passage. The second request is for approval
to have buildings and parking between Northwest Passage and Stormwater Management
SWM) Facility #10. The third request is to replace a section of Northwest Passage which had
sidewalks and street trees on only one side of the street with sidewalks and street trees on both
sides of the street.
The building orientation parallel to Northwest Passage can be approved as shown on the site
plan. This approval is conditioned on tree lawns being provided with street trees between the
back of the curb and the sidewalk. This street section must be provided on both sides of
Northwest Passage across your property where residential units abut the street.
I am unable to make comments regarding the buildings and parking between Northwest
Passage and SWM Facility #10 because, based on comments by the County Engineer, there is
not enough information on the site plan that demonstrates appropriate design for erosion
control, stormwater management and safety. While I note that you have shown slope
reconstruction yielding 3:1 slopes on the site plan, according to the County Engineer, the SWM
facility cannot function as shown. (See comments from County Engineer.) In addition, as I said
in my letter of January 30, 2009, the site plan needs to demonstrate appropriate design for the
appearance from the Entrance Corridor (U.S. 29). Visual depictions would be suitable for this
purpose.
The request to have sidewalks and street trees on both sides of the street relates to a condition
of approval of your first request above regarding building orientation parallel to Northwest
Passage and can be approved.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 97 -4126
April 22, 2009
Richard Spurzem
Neighborhood Investments- NP,LCC
PO Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Re: Variation request dated March 9, 2009 accompanying SDP -2008 -00041 North Pointe
Preliminary Site Plan dated March 10, 2009 for North Pointe Northwest Residential Area
Dear Mr. Spurzem:
Thank you for your submittal of the variation request, pages 1 — 3 attached. You have
requested three variations with the submitted preliminary site plan:
To change the general location, number, design, layout and orientation of buildings and
parking areas such that residential units are oriented parallel to Northwest Passage.
To replace a section of Northwest Passage which had sidewalks and street trees on
only one side of the street with sidewalks and street'trees on both sides of the street.
To have buildings and parking between Northwest Passage and Stormwater
Management (SWM) Facility #10.
The first variation, to change the general location, number, design and orientation of buildings
parallel to Northwest Passage, is approved as shown on the preliminary site plan. This
approval is conditioned on planting strips being provided with street trees between the back of
the curb and the sidewalk as indicated in the second variation approved below. This street
section must be provided on both sides of Northwest Passage across your property where
residential units abut the street.
A corresponding variation, to have sidewalks and street trees on both sides of the street, is also
approved.
The analysis which I used for these two variations, which are approved as part of the
preliminary site plan review, follows:
Section 8.5.5.3 of the Zoning Ordinance allows the Director of Planning to grant minor variations
to the arrangement of buildings and uses shown on the plan, provided that the major elements
shown on the plan and their relationships remain the same as long as:
1) The variations are consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive
plan. The proposed variations for building orientation and a different street section support
the Neighborhood Model for a pedestrian orientation and buildings and spaces of human
scale. The proposed variations are not in conflict with the Neighborhood Model.
2) The variations do not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development. The variations would allow for more building coverage on the property;
however, the variation would not increase the approved density or intensity of the
development.
3) The variations do not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district. The variation will not adversely affect the timing
and phasing of development or any other development in the zoning district.
4) The variations do not require a special use permit. The variations do not require a
special use permit.
5) The variations are in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved
rezoning application. This variation is in conformity with the approved rezoning which, in
part, was intended to support the principles of the Neighborhood Model.
The third variation requested, to have buildings and parking between Northwest Passage and
SWM Facility # 10, will have to be considered in conjunction with the review of the final site
plan. Based on comments by the Director of Community Development, there is a strong
likelihood that appropriate design for erosion control, stormwater management and safety is not
possible with the design shown on the preliminary site plan. While I note that you have shown
slope reconstruction yielding 3:1 slopes on the site plan, according to the Director of Community
Development, it is extremely unlikely that SWM Facility # 10 can function as shown on the
preliminary site plan, (See comments from Director of Community Development.) I recommend
that you discuss concepts with Engineering staff before the final site plan is submitted. In
addition, as I said in my letter of January 30, 2009, the site plan needs to demonstrate
appropriate design for the appearance from the Entrance Corridor (U.S. 29). Visual depictions
would be suitable for this purpose.
Because the Director of Community Development can approve the preliminary site plan
contingent upon the appropriate demonstrations of stormwater management, consideration of
your requested variation related to SWM Facility #10 can be deferred to the final site plan.
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or need more information.
Sincerely,
V /- W
V. Wayne ilimberg
Director o Planning
Cc: Larry Davis
Mark Graham
Elaine Echols
Amelia McCulley
Gerald Gatobu
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia :22902 -4596
Phone (434).296-'5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
April 24, 2009
Richard Spurzem
Neighborhood Properties
P.O Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: SDP 2008 -00041 North Pointe [Northwest Residential Area] Preliminary Site Plan
Dear Sir:
Thank you for your March 9"', 2009 submittal of the above mentioned preliminary site plan, which is
hereby approved subject to the conditions outlined below. I have received comments from various
reviewers relative to this proposal and this letter offers several comments which are technical in nature,
and identify several major areas of importance that will need to be worked out during the final site plan
stage. The major issues are: proffered road improvements, layout and design of stormwater
management facilities especially Stormwater Management Facility #10 shown on the Application Plan
and encroachment into conservation and flood plain areas during construction. These issues are
discussed in the Comments section of this letter.
Conditions of Preliminary Site Plan Approval
The final site plan must comply with all requirements of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance and
other applicable regulations and must comply with the proffers accepted and the Application Plan
approved for Zoning Map Amendment 2000 -009 and the conditions imposed for Special Use Permit
2002 -072. In addition:
Current Development Preliminary site plan requirements that need to be addressed on the final site plan
are as follows:
32.7.2.8] Sidewalks: Provision shall be made for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways
which will enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the
site and from the site to adjacent property. The sidewalks along Northwest Passage end
before they get to U.S. Route 29. Sidewalks must extend to U.S. Route 29. Additionally,
please provide a network of sidewalks that will enable pedestrians to walk safely and
conveniently between buildings on the site and from the site to the proposed trails and
adjacent properties. Provision shall be made where appropriate for pedestrian walkways in
relation to private and public areas of recreation and open space such as schools, parks,
gardens and areas of similar nature.
32.5.61] Existing and proposed streets, access easements, alley easements and rights -of-
way, and travelways, together with street names, state route numbers, right -of -way lines
and widths, centerline radii, and pavement widths. Please show the existing private
access easement to the Korean Church.
32.5.6.r] Setbacks shown on the preliminary site plan by the trail are incorrect. Please
make sure the 10 foot rear setback and the 6 foot setbacks are shown correctly.
Additionally, some buildings shown on the preliminary site plan are in the 8 foot front
setback. Please revise.
i• Please provide written certification from a licensed surveyor or engineer confirming
that the conservation line shown on the application plan for Zoning Map
Amendment 2000-009 and the conservation line shown on this site plan are in the
exact same location.
Variation Requests See the letter from V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning, dated April 22, 2009.
Comments
Layout and design: The layout and design of this site is of major concern. The Director of Community
Development has expressed concern, and has proposed phasing. His comment is as follows:
I did not note any indication of phasing the project (18- 32.5.6.c.). That said, I remember
specifically discussing this at time of rezoning and noting I did not see how this property could be
developed without phasing. While I cannot speak to how a future phasing plan might require a
revised preliminary site plan, if there is interest in phasing the project to address the erosion and
sediment control requirements, the applicant should discuss concepts with engineering staff as
early as possible. Once again, I caution this is a very difficult site.
Stormwater Management County Engineering Staff and the Director of Community Development have
concerns with the stormwater management facilities shown on the preliminary site plan. The design and
layout of Stormwater Management Facility #10 on the Application Plan needs to be revised on the final
site plan. The Director of Community Development had the following comments.
With respect to the Stormwater Management Facility # 10 on the Application Plan, which is
shown in the southeast corner of the proposed development (preliminary site plan), I note the
following:
a. This facility must demonstrate that it can be adequately maintained in the future.
This includes assuring a dump truck can reach this facility and haul spoils away as
well as assuring equipment can reach the spoils. As shown, it appears a truck
does not have reasonable access to this area and the facility may be so steep and
deep that other equipment cannot remove the spoils from the bottom of
facility.
b. Under the proffers, the property has a high threshold for stormwater management.
Prior to starting any design on this facility, the applicant is strongly encouraged to
discuss design concepts with County staff. It is anticipated this requirement will
prove difficult to satisfy and it is in everyone's interest to avoid an iterative plan
review process.
c. Similar to b, the property also has a proffer for a high threshold of erosion and
sediment control protection that will likely prove difficult to satisfy. Staff would
prefer to avoid iterative plan reviews while solutions are. developed.
d. Related to c, staff anticipates that the adjoining school site /park will be requested
in the time frame of this development and the proffers require this site to be
graded before given to the County. As such, this stormwater facility is likely to
prove necessary for use with erosion and sediment control associated with that
proffered grading. While there is no requirement this facility provide the
necessary sediment control for that grading, I did not see how it can be otherwise
addressed. I also note that if the grading is not done as specified by the approved
proffers, the property of this site plan could be subject to a zoning violation as a
result of that failure. Once again, it appears in everyone's best interest to work
this out before submitting a final site plan.
Other required stormwater facilities need to be designed as follows:
With respect to the other stormwater management or erosion and sediment control
facilities required for this plan, the applicant is strongly encouraged to discuss design
concepts with engineering staff prior to starting on plans. It is anticipated it will prove
difficult to comply with the proffer requirements and ordinance requirements. County
staff does not have the discretion to allow encroachments into the floodplain or
conservation areas for these facilities or for any grading. County staff recommends that
the applicant discuss concepts with engineering staff before the final site plan is
submitted.
Proffers Proffers that need to be addressed relate to engineering comments on proffered road
improvements, stormwater and erosion and sediment control and are taken to be a binding commitment as
to what you will be constructing. Proffers that need to be satisfied are as follows:
1. Section 41 Flood Plain: compliance: [Action required with this preliminary site plan
and future site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to Albemarle County Engineering
Review. Design guidelines in the engineering comments will help with grading and limits
of disturbance that may currently encroach into the floodplain. See engineering comments
above for guidance.
2. Section-4 ' '2 - Storm Water Management Plan Compliance. [Action required with this
preliminry site plan and future-site plan submittal]. This proffer is subject to
Albemarle County Engineering Review. See engineering comment above for guidance.
Design ofstormwater facilities on the site must meet County Engineering standards.
3. Section 5.3.1 Internal street construction standards compliance: [Action required
with this preliminary site plan and future site plan submittal]. All proffered
transportation improvements must be shown on the final site plan. See engineering
comments for guidance.
4. Section 5.3.1.c Phase III Road Improvements compliance. [Action required with this
preliminary site plan] .Approval of a subdivision plat or site plan for any development of
either the Virginia Land Trust Company (32 -22K) or the Jackson Trust Property (32 -22H)
or any portion thereof triggers this proffer. See engineering comment for guidance. This
proffer is triggered by the fact that this development is a site plan within the properties of
the Mirginia Land Trust Company (32 -22K) and the Jacluon Trust Property (32- 22I3).
Section , 5.31.C.1. Northernmost Entrance (opposite Lewis and Clark Drive) on U.S. Route
29 compliance, Northwest Passage and North Pointe Boulevard: [Highly important action
required with final site plan submittal] With respect to Northwest Passage and North Pointe
Boulevard, it is noted that the proffers require Northwest Passage to be completed between U.S.
Route 29 and North Pointe Boulevard, and for North Pointe Boulevard to be completed between
Northwest Passage and Northside Drive in association with this phase of development. While the
preliminary site plan has not shown this improvement, those roads must be approved and bonded
for construction prior to approval of a final site plan for this property. That will include erosion
and sediment control plans as well as stormwater management plans for that construction.
See section i -v of Proffer 5.3.1.0 for all of the required Phase III road improvements.
Detailed plans and computations will be required in conjunction with the final site plan.
See engineering comments for guidance.
Special Use Permit Conditions (SP -2002 -072 North Pointe Residential Uses) that must be met
with engineering guidance relate to encroachment into conservation areas and are as follows:
1. Conservation areas. The conservation areas shown on the Application Plan shall remain
undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the satisfaction of the
County's program authority for the Water Protection Ordinance (Chapter 17 of the
Albemarle County Code) (the "Program Authority "); except that the pedestrian paths shown
on the Application Plan may be placed in a conservation area where shown on the
Application Plan. Storm drainage outfalls and other pedestrian paths may only be placed in
conservation areas if the Program Authority finds that no other location is reasonably
available and that the disturbance is necessary for such a proposed use. Notwithstanding the
terms of this Condition 3 to the contrary, the Program Authority may approve a utility main
within a conservation area, even if it is not shown on the Application Plan, and the Program
Authority may approve other disturbances and/or measures as may be appropriate in the
Program Authority's discretion to further protect a conservation area. Comment. It does not
appear possible to build this site as shown on the preliminary site plan without encroaching
on conservation andfloodplain areas (for erosion and sediment control measures). County
staff recommends that the applicant discuss concepts with Engineering staff before the final
site plan is submitted.
2. Conservation areas with Utilities. The conservation areas with utilities shown on the
Application Plan shall remain undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts
to the satisfaction of the Program Authority; except that: (4A). The streets and pedestrian
paths shown on the Application Plan may be placed in a conservation area with utilities
where shown on the Application Plan. Other pedestrian paths, other streets, and sanitary
sewers, storm drainage outfalls, and/or stream mitigation measures may only be placed in a
conservation area with utilities if the Program Authority finds that no other location is
reasonably available and the disturbance is necessary for such a proposed use. In any event,
the construction, maintenance and use of the improvements shall have the minim
environmental impact on the conservation area with utilities necessary for the improvements
to be established and maintained, and the long -term impacts shall be adequately mitigated.
Nothing in this condition shall be construed to obviate the requirements established for
stream buffers under Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code or shall constitute a waiver
of such requirements. Comment. It does not appear possible to build this site as shown on
the preliminary site plan without encroaching on conservation and floodplain areas (for
erosion and sediment control measure).
4
Compliance with Entrance Corridor Overlay District regulations: This site falls within the
Route 29 Entrance Corridor. Consequently, ARB review and approval are required prior to final
site plan approval. ARB applications, checklists, guidelines and schedules are available on line at
www.albemarle.org
Comments received from other departments and agencies are as
Albemarle County Service Authority: Comments from Gary Whelan (Engineer, Albemarle
County Service Authority).
See attached comment letter from Gary Whelan dated April 9
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority: Comments from Justin Weiler dated 4/2/2009 (Engineer,
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority).
RWSA has the following comments:
1. RWSA review of the final site plan will be required. As part of this review, test pits will
be required to verify the horizontal and vertical locations of the 12" RWSA waterline.
Special design notes will need to be added to the plans as deemed necessary by RWSA.
2. The RWSA waterline that is currently located in Rt. 29 may need to be relocated due to
the widening of Rt. 29. Please provide RWSA with a copy of the Rt. 29 expansion plans
so that we can evaluate the impacts to our waterline and coordinate the possible relocation
of our waterline with VDOT.
3. If the anticipated average daily wastewater flows from this development exceeds 40,000
gallons per day then, per DEQ, a flow acceptance review is required. ACSA should
submit a flow acceptance request to RWSA to initiate the review.
4. Please note that the water system that will serve the proposed development currently
operates at a hydraulic grade line of approximately 805' above sea level, but in the future
the system will operate at an HGL of 652' above sea level. Please use an HGL of 652' for
sizing all waterlines in the development, and provide hydraulic calculations for review.
Virginia Department of Transportation: Comments from Joel Denunzio dated 4/3/2009:
The Charlottesville Residency Staff reviewed the above referenced Preliminary Site Plan dated 3-
09-09 and the following comments need to be addressed prior to VDOT recommending approval
of the final site plan:
1. VDOT is working to assign the proper classification for the public streets in North Pointe.
Based on county staffs discussion with VDOT, there is no interest is changing in either the
general layout of streets or the street widths, but VDOT needs to confirm the design speed for the
roads. That design speed will in turn establish minim curve radii for roads as well as curve
values for crests and sags on the road's vertical alignment. County staff is providing VDOT a
copy of the approved application plan and traffic study done for the rezoning of North Pointe,
which will be used for the "concept plan" required by VDOT's subdivision street regulations.
VDOT indicates this information should be adequate for them to establish the road design speeds.
Staff notes this is not a requirement for approving the preliminary site plan but the applicant will
need VDOT to establish this road classification before submitting any public road plans.
2. The data included in the road plans need to meet the requirements of the above mentioned
subdivision street regulations. No review of road plans can occur prior to VDOT approving the
functional classification of the roads within the development.
3. Intersection layouts, typical sections, utility placements, geometric standards and any other
design items shown in the preliminary plan may need adjustment upon review of the construction
plan. All design needs to be in accordance with the VDOT Road Design Manual and Drainage
Manual.
4. Plans for improvements to Route 29 should be submitted prior to any site plan approvals to
avoid conflicts. Items such as intersection layout, auxiliary lanes, and utility placements on the
Route 29 corridor will need to be addressed with the plans.
Please contact me at.your earliest convenience at 434 - 296 -5832 ext 3385 if you have any
questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
Gerald Gatobu
Principal Planner
Current Development
Cc: Larry Davis
Greg Kamptner
Mark Graham
Amelia McCulley
Bill Fritz
Wayne Cilimberg
Elaine Echols
COIT NTYOF ALBEMARLE
Department ofCommunity Development
401 ;McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 9 -4120
3 September 2{ } { }8
Richard T. Spurzem
Neighborhood Investments - -- NP LLC
P.O. Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: SDP -2008 -00041 North Pointe Preliminary Site flan
Dear Mr. Spurrem:
Pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2 -2260 and Albemarle County Code § 18- 32.4.2.5, the
above referenced preliminary site plan is disapproved. The specific reasons t« r disapproval are
provided with references to specific dull adopted ordinances. regulations or policies. including
the application plan approved for ZMA- 2000 -09, the proffers accepted in conjunction with the
approval of ZMA- 2000 -09. and the conditions of SP- 2002 -72 and SP- 2005 -34. Required
modifications or corrections that will permit approval of the site plan are included as well.
A. Reasons for disapproval
I. Development in the e conservation are application plan: The site plan does
not comply with the approved application plan for Z%1 Its 20€ 0 -09 because it shoves development
within the eastern conservation area. whose boundary is identified on the site plan as the
conservation line." This item cannot be varied under Albemarle County Code 18- 8.5.5.3. See
the attached determination of the Zoning !administrator and the Director of Planning dated
September 23, 2008, J o have a site plan that conforms with the application plan, remove the
building and parking areas from the eastern conservation area.
2. Development in the eastern conservation area: special use permit condition The
site plan does not comply with Condition 3 of SP- 2002 -?2 because it shows building and parking
areas within the eastern conservation area. This item cannot be varied under Albemarle Count,
Code § 18- 8.5.53. See the attached determination of Zoning Administrator and the Director
of Planning dated September 23. 2008. To comply with Condition 3, remove the building and
parkin <g, areas from the eastern conservation area,
3. Disturbance in I 0 0-year flood plain: proffer and special use permit The site plan
does not comply with Proffer 4.1 of ZMA- 2000 -009 because it shoves land disturbance in the
I00 -rear flood plain for storm pipes north of proposed Su'kl facility 11. Proffer 4.1 of ZM,; - %-
2000 -009 states in part that the "area of the 100 -year flood plain within the Project shall remain
undisturbed except for road crossings, public utility- facilities and their crossings. and pedestrian
and biking trails, and onl; to the extent such exceptions are permitted by County ordinances and
regulations." In a planned development such a North Pointe. accepted proffers are "included as
part of the zoning regulations applicable to the planned development." (Albemarle C °ounty Code
18- 8.5.4). SP- 2006 -034 allows disturbance for the aradin4= Northwest Passage and certain
utilities. The disturbance for the storm pipes is not a disturbance authorized by SP- 2006 -0,4.
F.ach use. buildina and structure, ;whether primary or accessory. maw -be established onl% in
compliance with all applicable regulations ofthe zoning district upon which the particular use,
building or structure is located. (Albemarle County Code ` 18- 2.1.1) To comply with Proffer
4. 1, remove the storm pipes from the I00 -vear flood plain.
4. Buildinus and parking areas not in conservation are The location, number.
design. lavout and orientation of buildings and parking areas not in conservation areas do riot
comply ,with the approved application plan for ZMA 2000 -09. These buildings and parking
areas could be allowed as shown on the site plan only with a variation under Albemarle County
Code § 18- 8.3.5._,. See the attached determination of the Zoning Administrator dated September
23. 2008. To have a site plan that conforms with the application plan, show the buildings and
parking areas not in conservation areas in the location. number, design, layout and orientation
shown on the application plan.
B. For information only: issues to be addressed as conditions for final site plan approval and
related recommendations
The following are provided tier information only and are not reasons for disapproval of
the preliminary site plan. If and when the preliminary site plan is approved, the followwing would
be conditions for final site plan approval. Related recommendations are also provided. The
precise language of conditions are subject to change when the preliminary site plan is
approved.
1. Stormkvater management The site plan must provide adequate stormw'ater
management that satisfies Proffer 4.2 ofZMA- 2000 -009. Storrs water management facilities
must capture 80 ° ,0 of total suspended solids. as described in Article 64 of the Practice of
Watershed Protection (2000 ed. M published by the Center for 'Watershed Protection. (References:
ZMA- 2000 -09. Proffer 4.2; .Albemarle County Code § 17 -303. I7- 312(c), 17- 315(b) and (c)_
and 18- 32._` VSMH 3.O6)
1 Transportation: Proffer 5.3.1 of Z_MA- 2000 -09 requires that detailed road plans
be submitted for review and approval by VDOT and the County. 1 finder Proffer 5.3.1(c ), prior to
approval of the final site plan. all associated permits and all associated bonds required for the
construction of the road improvements required bv Proffer 5.,.1(c) must be obtained and
provided. and the lollov ing improvements must be constructed unless these road improvements
have been completed by others.
A. UI.S. Route 29 Southbound -- construction of left turn lane with taper.
B. Northwest Passage: from U.S. Route 29 to North Pointe Boulevard.
C. t'.S. Route 29 Northbound — construction of a ri <aht hand turn lane.
geometries of which will be subject to VDOT approval.
D. Ifnot already constructed_ North Pointe Boulevard between Northside
Drive East and Northwest Passage.
VDOT notes that all road and road proffer items must be in accordance with the most
current street standards. Some previous comments that VDOT provided may require some
modifications to the layout of the roads. Any items that are being requested for approval that
will not allow adjustments for road design issues should not be approved.
3. Water and sever Obtain verification from the Albemarle County Service
Authority that adequate capabilitt for water and seller exists to serve the development
established by the site plan. (Albemarle County Code § 18-32-7.53)
4. Street names Display the names of streets shown on the final site plan as
required b\ Albemarle County Code § 7 -2078 and 5 18 -3?.: -60). Contact the Office of
Geographic Data. Services in the Department of Community Development at 296-583" with a list
of road name suggestions for this site plan. There will need to be as mane as six (6) road names.
orthyest Passage "" should be identified as "LeNvis and Clark Drive" as provided in Section
4(k) of the Albemarle County Road laming and Road Numbering Manual.
5. Certificate of appropriateness Obtain approval of a certificate of appropriateness
as required by Albemarle County Code § 18- 3().6. Architectural Review Board applications.
checklists. guidelines and schedules are available on line ativ.tlhL
C. For i only: recommendations
The following comments and recommendations are provided for information only and are
not reasons for disapproval of the preliminary site plan.
I. Protecting trees within conservation areas from development outside of
conservation areas It appears the proposed layout may harm trees in conservation areas directly
adjacent to proposed retaining walls. The County's "s engineering staff recommends against the
use of retaining walls directly adjacent to conservation areas.
2. ,Amount of earthwork The proposed grading layout shows a significant increase
in earthwork compared to the application plan. It appears that the grading in the application plan
tivas designed kNith the existing topographN in mind. while the proposed grading plan shows an
extravagant amount of earthwork. including large cut and fill areas and the use of tall retaining.
walls. See the diagrams below.
Conservation
Area (v oodedi
Application Flan Example Cross- Section (not to scale)
conservation
Area (wooded)
Ai
Existing Topo
Conservvtion
Area (woo
on (not to scale)p plan Example Cross- Secti
nlav he appealed as provided in Viritlia Code 1. ?fiQ and Albemarle -
l . his disapproval _
Count- Code ti I S -3. •' 6.
vcur earliest ccnvenicncc if you have anv questitltls Or require additionall3leasecontactlieat .
information.
Sincereh .
Gerald Gatollu, "enior Planner
Divi >icjn cif "I._clnin & Current Devekopnlent
Department of C'tlnllllttntty I)evelc,ptnent
f.ncl:;sttre: Oly,<ial Detertllination
COUNTY OF.-ALBEMARLE
Department of C. q mmunity Development
401 McIntire North Wing
Charlott6sville, Virginia 22902-4696
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434)
September 23, 2008
Mr. Richard Spurzem
Neighborhood Investments -NP LLC
PO. Drawer R
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Re: SCSI -2GO8-66041 N'orfh':Pointe PreIIMtnarV:i Site :Plan - Northwest Residertthil
Ar-'.eai -.Protimin'lir. Ryan" tais-t.:r,64ised 2, 2008y
Dear,Mr. S urzem:
We are ,in receipt. of your preliminary site plan for North Pointe — Northwest Residential
Area. -Based on our review of preliminary site plan SDP-2008-00041 (the "Site Plan"),
Wb`ftave that the Site Plan does not comply with the approved application
plan for ZMA2000-0009 North PointeqI (the "Application Plan',') and SP2002;00072
tial Uses at North: Pointe. This, determination is based, on the following.
1h., ..,01a 'od deVelopmentsuch a North Pointe, thb. application: plan is Included ftaspa
6ffhe zoning, regulations applicable to the planned development." (Albemarle County,
Code § 18= 8.54). Site, plans- are reviewed for compliance with .the approved application
plan. (Alberpatle County C€ §. 18-8.5.5.2(4)) Each use, building and structure,
Whet h0e:ptimaryo r `complianceaccessory, may "be established only in with all
a'opli.cabic:i'regulations of th6.zonitig district upon Which the particular-use, building or
structure- is. located. (Albemarle County Cod,e" 1:8- 2.1.1) The "applicable regulations"
includ only the proffers but also relevant special use permit conditions.
1:,, The location of the eastern conservation area is not correctly shown on the site
plan and uses and activities are proposed within the conservation area
Application plans must show the areas designated as conservation areas. (Albemarle
County Code The eastern conservation area, whose boundary is
identified on the Site Plan as the "east conservation line," is not shown correctly on the
Site Plan.
Mr. Richard Spurzem
September 23, 2008
Page 2
Conservation areas" are defined in Albemarle County Code § 18 -3.1 to mean:
Conservation area: An area identified on a plan submitted for approval
which contains cultural assets or natural features such as non -tidal
wetlands, floodplain, slopes identified in the open space element of the
comprehensive plan, or streams and stream buffers, within which only
limited disturbance or development is allowed. Uses allowed in
conservation areas include, but are not limited to, utilities, greenways,
pedestrian paths, streets, and stormwater management facilities, where, in
the opinion of the director of engineering, no other location is reasonably
available and when these improvements have the least impact possible on
the environmental features of the area.
The uses and activities allowed in the eastern conservation area are also subject to
Condition 3 of SP- 2002 -072, which is more restrictive than the uses allowed under the
definition of "conservation area" in Albemarle County Code § 18 -3.1. Condition 3
states:
The conservation areas shown on the Application Plan shall remain
undisturbed and shall be protected from development impacts to the
satisfaction of the County s program authority for the Water Protection
Ordinance (Chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code) (the "Program
Authority "); except that the pedestrian paths shown on the Application
Plan may be placed in a conservation area where shown on the
Application Plan. Storm drainage outfalls and other pedestrian paths may
only be placed in conservation areas if the Program Authority finds that no
other location is reasonably available and that the disturbance is
necessary for such a proposed use. Notwithstanding the terms of this
Condition 3 to the contrary, the Program Authority may approve a utility
main within a conservation area, even if it is not shown on the Application
Plan, and the Program Authority may approve other disturbances and /or
measures as may be appropriate in the Program Authority's discretion to
further protect ac conservation area.
As shown on the Application Plan, the eastern conservation area begins at the top of
the slope where critical slopes begin. When overlaying Sheet C -9 on Sheet C -7 of the
Site Plan, one can see where the top of the critical slopes begins. Sheet C -9 of the Site
Plan shows development on lands within the eastern conservation area shown on the
Application Plan. The overlay exhibit you provided to demonstrate that the slopes
shown on the Site Plan are preserved as shown on the Application Plan do not reflect
the same scale.
A large portion of critical slopes within the eastern conservation area would be disturbed
by proposed grading and the construction of building and parking areas comprised of
retaining walls, buildings, travelways and other improvements. The Application Plan
Mr. Richard Spurzem
September 23, 2008
Page 3
and Condition 3 of SP -2002 -072 do not allow these improvements in the eastern
conservation area. Neither the boundary of the eastern conservation area as shown on
the Application Plan nor Condition 3 of SP- 2002 -072 can be varied under Albemarle
County Code § 18- 8.5.5.3.
2. Buildings and parking areas not in conservation areas
When buildings and uses are shown on an application plan, changes in their arrangement
are permitted only if a variation is granted under Albemarle County Code § 18-
8.5.5.3(a)(2). The location, number, design, layout and orientation of buildings and
parking areas not in conservation areas do not comply with the Application Plan for the
following reasons:
A. Buildings and parking areas are shown on the Site Plan in an area
adjacent to SWM Facility #10 where the Application Plan shows no buildings or parking.
B. The number, design, and layout of the buildings shown on the Site
Plan near SWM Facility #10 result in proposed stormwater facilities which will require
construction of steep slopes inside the basins and cause parking lots near the basins to
have 10 foot retaining walls. Although details of the stormwater facilities were not
required on the application plan, the proposed grading and stormwater management
uses shown on the Site Plan do not comply with the Application Plan,
C. Unit orientation towards Northwest Passage is different than shown
on the Application Plan on both the western and eastern side of Northwest Passage.
Units were not shown along the street on the western side of Northwest Passage on the
Application Plan. This feature does not comply with the Application Plan,
D. Units on the western side of Northwest Passage are shown on the
Site Plan in areas where no development was shown on the Application Plan. The
number, design, and layout of these buildings cause the need for a stormwater
management facility west of the easement for the Korean Church that requires
construction of steep slopes inside the basins. This area is in the Entrance Corridor and
if a basin had been anticipated at this location, commitments would have been made for
review of the basin by the Architectural Review Board as they were for all other basins
visible from the Entrance Corridor.
If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty (30)
days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-
2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall
be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning
Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the
grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with
the fee of $120. The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the
date of this letter.
Mr. Richard Spurzem
September 23, 2008
Page 4
if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
fb ",, Y-j
Amelia G. McCulley, A'I.C.P.
Zoning Administrator
Wayn4/Cilimberg
Director of Planning
cc: [Owners of all parcels within North Pointe PD]