Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600074 Review Comments Initial Site Plan 2017-02-24Short Review Comments Report for: SDP201600074 SubApplication Type: Timberland Park Apartments - Initial DIGITAL Initial Site Plan Date Completed:02/07/2017 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer CDD Inspections Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:Rearrange the barrier-free parking spaces at the community center so that at least one of them is van-accessible. Division: Date Completed:02/24/2017 Reviewer:Rob VanLier Dept of Conservation and Recreation Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments:2-24-17 Never received a response from DCR. CPP Division: Date Completed:02/05/2017 Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 12/9/16. 1. Add remote FDC's on buildings #2 and #3 so the whole development is the same. 2. Fire flow test required before final approval. Please attach fire flow test to final copy of plans. Division: Date Completed:02/08/2017 Reviewer:Adam Moore VDOT Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:-VDOT entrance permit will be required. -The storm pipes and structures adjacent to buildings #4 & #5 are missing labels and profiles. -The storm pipe from structures 16-14 is labeled as a detention pipe. However, it is not on your property. You will need a maintenance agreement and permission to have this SWM facility located off site. - It appears more storm inlets are needed throughout the site. Drainage and spreads from the inlets should not run across travel ways (out of the parking area) or top the curbs. Since the initial site plan is conceptual, this can be evaluated further with the storm calculations at final site plan. Division: Date Completed:02/09/2017 Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:02/08/2017 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:02/02/2017 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB Review Status:No Objection See ARB action letter dated November 11, 2016. Division: Page:1 of 2 County of Albemarle Printed On:March 17, 2017 Reviews Comments:See ARB action letter dated November 11, 2016. Date Completed:02/08/2017 Reviewer:Victoria Fort RWSA Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:No Comments or Objections Division: Date Completed:01/30/2017 Reviewer:Derek Bedarf CDD E911 Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:New road name required. See uploaded Bluebeam and PDF for details. Division: Date Completed:02/07/2017 Reviewer:Emily Cox CDD Engineering Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:-VDOT entrance permit will be required. -The storm pipes and structures adjacent to buildings #4 & #5 are missing labels and profiles. -The storm pipe from structures 16-14 is labeled as a detention pipe. However, it is not on your property. You will need a maintenance agreement and permission to have this SWM facility located off site. - It appears more storm inlets are needed throughout the site. Drainage and spreads from the inlets should not run across travel ways (out of the parking area) or top the curbs. Since the initial site plan is conceptual, this can be evaluated further with the storm calculations at final site plan. -Ensure that all walkways are ADA compliant. Division: Date Completed:02/09/2017 Reviewer:Adam Moore VDOT Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:From: Moore, Adam PE (VDOT) [mailto:Adam.Moore@vdot.virginia.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 2:24 PM To: Christopher Perez <cperez@albemarle.org> Subject: sDP22016-00074 Timberland Park Apartments Chris, To follow up from the SRC meeting, I do need to add to my comments: 1. Please note that any work proposed within Interstate right-of-way must be reviewed and approved by VDOT’s Central Office. Thanks. Adam J. Moore, P.E. | Assistant Resident Engineer/Area Land Use Engineer VDOT - Charlottesville Residency 701 VDOT Way | Charlottesville | VA main 434.422.9782 Division: Date Completed:02/24/2017 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Page:2 of 2 County of Albemarle Printed On:March 17, 2017 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 February 8, 2017 Kent O'Donohue, Jr. 1561 Commerce Road, Suite 401 Verona, VA 24482 SDP201600074 Timberland Park Apt - Initial Site Plan Mr. O'Donohue: The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Initial comments for the following divisions of the Department of Community Development and other agencies, as applicable, are attached: Albemarle County Planning Services Virginia Department of Transportation Architectural Review Board (ARB) Albemarle County Engineering Services Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue Albemarle County Information Services (E911) Albemarle County Building Inspections Albemarle County Service Authority [Comments pending to be forwarded once received] Department of Conservation and Recreation [Comments pending to be forwarded once received] 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 will be required to be resolved prior to Final Site Plan approval. The lead reviewer will either approve with conditions or deny the initial site plan within 15 days of the site review meeting. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434-296-5832 Fax 434-972-4126 The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.): [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] 1. [35.1] Fees. The public notification fee of $215 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Please pay the fee prior to any further review/action of the plan. 2. [32.5.1(c), 4.19] Front Setbacks/Non-Infill. The property meets the definition of a corner lot (abutting on two or more streets at their intersection). Front maximums do not apply to a corner lot abutting a principal arterial highway. Revise the Front Setbacks as follows: `Minimum Front Setback — S feet. Maximum Front Setback — None. " Also, list Non - Infill Stepbacks as: "Front Stepback on Old Lynchburg Road — the third story of Building 2 shall be stepped back a minimum of 15 feet". 3. [32.5.1(c), 4.191 Side Setbacks/Non-Infill Building Separation. On sheet 1 under Setbacks please label it as a "Non - Infill Setback" development. Also, under the Side Setbacks provide the following note: "Minimum Side Setback - any building that exceeds 35 feet in height shall be separated from any other building by 10 feet plus one foot for each foot the building exceeds 35 feet in height". As proposed there is not any problem with your side setbacksibuilding separation. 4. [32.5.2(d), 30.7.4(b)(h)] Slopes less than 25% based on new topographic information. The steep slopes (preserved and managed slopes) depicted on the plan do not match those slopes that are shown on the County GIS Overlay. When dealing with preserved and managed slopes you cannot mix and match topographic information between County GIS and field survey, as the overlay is truly a zoning overlay district adopted by the County. You must choose one or the other in their entirety. The plan depicts portions of "additional" preserved slopes being impacted by improvements associated with the proposal (parking area and BMP). Please omit the "additional preserved slopes" on the plan. 5. [4.16, 4.16.11 Recreation Area. On the plan provide recreational area calculations (required and provided). The site is required to provide 200SF/unit of recreation area onsite in common area or open space, for a minimum of 16,000 SF. Please document on the plan the areas being provided to meet the recreation area requirements onsite and assure they meet the guidelines as provided in Section 4.16.1: [1. Slope in active recreation areas shall not exceed ten (10) percent. Slope and drainage shall be approved by the county engineer; 2. The size and shape of each recreation area shall be adequate for the intended use; 3. Groundcover shall consist of turf grass or contained mulch such as pine bark, shredded tires, or pea gravel; 4. Existing wooded or steep areas may qualms as passive recreation area provided no other suitable area is available on the site; S. Access shall be adequate forpedestrians and service vehicles if necessary; 6. Location shall be compatible with adjoining uses, convenient to users and suitable for supervision.] 6. [4.16.2] Minimum Facilities within the Recreation Areas. On the final site plan document the amenities provided in the tot lots: 1 sing set (4 seats), 1 slide, 2 climbers, 1 buckabout or whirl, two benches. 7. [32.7.9.7(a)(2)] Screening/Parking Areas. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent residential districts. Revise the landscape plan to provide the required screening as provided in Sec 32.7.9.7. Memorandum To: Kent O'Donohue, Jr. From: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: February 8, 2017 Subject: SDP201600074 Timberland Park Ant - Initial Site Plan The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.): [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] 1. [35.1] Fees. The public notification fee of $215 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Please pay the fee prior to any further review/action of the plan. 2. [32.5.1(c), 4.19] Front Setbacks/Non-Infill. The property meets the definition of a corner lot (abutting on two or more streets at their intersection). Front maximums do not apply to a corner lot abutting a principal arterial highway. Revise the Front Setbacks as follows: `Minimum Front Setback — S feet. Maximum Front Setback — None. " Also, list Non - Infill Stepbacks as: "Front Stepback on Old Lynchburg Road — the third story of Building 2 shall be stepped back a minimum of 15 feet". 3. [32.5.1(c), 4.191 Side Setbacks/Non-Infill Building Separation. On sheet 1 under Setbacks please label it as a "Non - Infill Setback" development. Also, under the Side Setbacks provide the following note: "Minimum Side Setback - any building that exceeds 35 feet in height shall be separated from any other building by 10 feet plus one foot for each foot the building exceeds 35 feet in height". As proposed there is not any problem with your side setbacksibuilding separation. 4. [32.5.2(d), 30.7.4(b)(h)] Slopes less than 25% based on new topographic information. The steep slopes (preserved and managed slopes) depicted on the plan do not match those slopes that are shown on the County GIS Overlay. When dealing with preserved and managed slopes you cannot mix and match topographic information between County GIS and field survey, as the overlay is truly a zoning overlay district adopted by the County. You must choose one or the other in their entirety. The plan depicts portions of "additional" preserved slopes being impacted by improvements associated with the proposal (parking area and BMP). Please omit the "additional preserved slopes" on the plan. 5. [4.16, 4.16.11 Recreation Area. On the plan provide recreational area calculations (required and provided). The site is required to provide 200SF/unit of recreation area onsite in common area or open space, for a minimum of 16,000 SF. Please document on the plan the areas being provided to meet the recreation area requirements onsite and assure they meet the guidelines as provided in Section 4.16.1: [1. Slope in active recreation areas shall not exceed ten (10) percent. Slope and drainage shall be approved by the county engineer; 2. The size and shape of each recreation area shall be adequate for the intended use; 3. Groundcover shall consist of turf grass or contained mulch such as pine bark, shredded tires, or pea gravel; 4. Existing wooded or steep areas may qualms as passive recreation area provided no other suitable area is available on the site; S. Access shall be adequate forpedestrians and service vehicles if necessary; 6. Location shall be compatible with adjoining uses, convenient to users and suitable for supervision.] 6. [4.16.2] Minimum Facilities within the Recreation Areas. On the final site plan document the amenities provided in the tot lots: 1 sing set (4 seats), 1 slide, 2 climbers, 1 buckabout or whirl, two benches. 7. [32.7.9.7(a)(2)] Screening/Parking Areas. Parking areas shall be screened from adjacent residential districts. Revise the landscape plan to provide the required screening as provided in Sec 32.7.9.7. 8. [32.7.9.7(a)(3)] Screening/Features that May Have Negative Visual Impacts. Retaining walls that are over 6 foot tall which face an abutting residential development are considered to cause negative visual impacts and require screening. On the final site plan please call out any segments of the many retaining walls onsite which meet the above criteria and provide the required screening. 9. [32.5.2(e), 32.7.9.4(c)] Existing landscape features. On the landscape plan identify whether existing wooded areas being preserved are evergreen, deciduous, or a mix thereof 10. [32.7.9.2, 32.7.9.3, 32.7.9.41 Landscape Plan. The agent shall act on the landscape plan prior to final site plan approval. A complete review of the landscape plan submitted with the initial site plan was not conducted because of required changed to the site that may impact proposed plantings and/or require additional plantings. 11. [Albemarle County Engineering Design Standards Manual] Retaining Walls. Safety provisions for vehicles and pedestrians shall be required for all walls over 2.5 feet tall. This requirement can be met w/ a guardrail or fencing. Label and depict such safety measures on the final site plan. 12. [4.12.6] Parking Requirements. The plan lists 160 spaces required and provided; however, staff found 169 spaces. Please verify the number of spaces provided is accurate. 13. [32.7.2.1] Vehicular Access to Site. Each entrance onto any public street shall be designed and constructed as required by the standards of the Virginia Department of Transportation. VDOT approval of the entrance to the site shall be required prior to final site plan approval. 14. [32.6.2(h)] Signature Panel. Omit the Health Department from the signature block. 15. [Comment] The title of the plan provides an SDP#, which is associated with the preapplication plan. Either revise the title to reference the pre -application plan after the file #, or revise the title to provide the correct SDP# for the initial site plan: SDP2016-74. 16. [32.5.1(c)] Dimensions. Provide dimensions on all travelway aisles into and out of the parking area. 17. [32.5.1(c)] Dimensions. Throughout the plan dimension all proposed improvements. 18. [32.5.2(a)] The plan inaccurately depicts the adjacent property, Sherwood Manor's Common Area, as extending to the center of Old Lynchburg Road. The Sherwood Manor subdivision plat dedicated right-of-way along Old Lynchburg Road prior to its realignment with the VDOT 5' Street Extension project. Refer to the attached Site Plan Markup and the Sherwood Manor plat (DB 504 PG 114). Please accurately depict this on the plan. 19. [Recommendation] An ongoing County project will rebuild the ADA ramp at Doncaster Lane to bring it up to current standards. Since the offsite right-of-way exists (as mentioned above), it is recommended that your development extend the curb & gutter and sidewalk within this right-of-way to complete the pedestrian improvements to Doncaster Lane. By continuing the pedestrian access as recommended (approximately a 60 foot section within Right -of -Way) these multifamily units will be connected to the existing sidewalks along Old Lynchburg Road, which will afford your residents safe and convenient access to a bustop further down Old Lynchburg Road (see site plan markup below for a visual). CHECKED x� DATE a ��OOOp I 1 C SCALE ' 1 REVISIONS 09-26-21 APPROX. 3W I 112-09-21 + J REFER TO THE `x I I ATTACHED PLAT 1 l i 1 ' TEMPO JUMP I PUMP LNE TO BE RAN I THROUGH CULVERT TO } I COMMON FO E% 1 I AREAPIAC ME N CROSS ROAD Jb �L SHEET NI TO LAN VDOTC4 1 & SPEC. WIQA RIGHT-OF-WAY A BEFORE CO TR. S) F11 EXTEND SIDEWALK WITHIN EXISTING RW TO JOB NO. DONCASTER ROAD 20. [Comment] Adjacent Residential Neighborhood Questions and Concerns. As a heads up, attached is a list of 10 questions provided by the Sherwood Manor development, which Planning staff received on 2-8-17. Please contact Christopher P. Perez in the Planning Division by using cperezkalbemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext. 3443 for further information. Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1801 Orange Road Culpeper, Virginia 22701 February 8, 2017 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Chris Perez Re: Timberland Park Apartments SDP -2016-00074 Initial Site Plan Dear Mr. Perez: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, most recently revised 9 December 2016, and offer the following comments: 1. Please show the existing right-of-way east of the proposed entrance to demonstrate that the sight distance left line lies within the public right-of-way. 2. Please note that the sight distance provided will be evaluated in the as -built condition. If the required sight distance is not provided the entrance will not be permitted by VDOT. 3. The entrance radii appear to be too small, please use page F-124 of the VDOT Road Design Manual for entrance design. Also, the curb returns should be offset from the EP as shown in the manual. 4. Please add the VDOT WP -2 detail to the plan and show on sheet C3 the limits of the required mill and overlay. 5. Please extend entrance profile to the centerline of SR 780. 6. Is the sanitary connection planned to be open cut? If so permission to open cut the roadway for utility crossings must be applied for in writing (with justification) to the Area Land Use Engineer. Furthermore, manholes in the pavement are to be avoided if at all possible. Please provide justification for the necessity and placement of this manhole. 7. Please provide erosion protection at this outfall location and provide a drainage easement. Additionally, please show that the existing culvert crossing SR 780 is adequate in the post -development condition. 8. The plans for the retaining wall for the portion fronting SR 780 must be submitted (along with a full geotechnical report) and approved by VDOT prior to approval of this site plan. 9. Detention pipe and weir plates will not be permitted within the public right-of-way. 10. Please provide a TMP plan in accordance with the latest version of the Virginia Work Area Protection Manual. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Error! Reference source not found. Chris Perez Page 2 11. Please combine the VDOT notes provided with the attached list. 12. Please add the turn lane warrants to the site plan. 13. Please clarify the calculations for the trip generation of the apartments in the peak hours (0.51 and 0.62 trips per hour). 14. Please add the storm water management calculations to the site plan. Note that final site plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual Appendices B(1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other requirements. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. If further information is desired please contact me at (434) 422-9782. Sincerely, 041v� 4 OZA� Adam J. M ore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING VDOT General and Traffic Control Notes: 1) A VDOT Permit will be required prior to the start of work and can be applied for prior to the pre - construction meeting so that it may be presented at that time so that any questions or concerns about the permit may be answered. 2) Pre -Construction is required on site to go over construction time frame for starting and completing road improvements within the right of way. 3) All work to be constructed to the latest VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications and Road and Bridge Standards. 4) All materials to be used in current and future right of way will be tested as stated in the VDOT Manual of Instructions available under VDOT Material Division for placement and required testing and intervals. Also VDOT inspector will also be available to answer questions or concerns and visit site as requested to review. 5) All traffic control will be per the latest edition of the Virginia Work Area Protection Manual or per the approved Maintenance of Traffic plan sheets provided by the developers engineer and approved prior to job going to construction. The contractor will have available at all times a certified person at a minimum with Basic Traffic Control Certification and for more advanced traffic control an individual with an Intermediate Traffic Control Certification would be preferred for more complex layouts. Allowable work hours will be reviewed when permitted if not referred to in the approved plan set. 6) All structures (DI'S) and cross pipe to have backfill testing and will need to reference structure number as referred to on the plan showing profile and depth and location of test. 7) All CD's and UD's to be inspected prior to covering. 8) All fill areas shall have backfill material from an approved source or a tested on site source and all testing reports for this material will need to be attached to the backfill density reports and a profile will need to be available with depth and location. 9) CBR test results will need to be made available for review and approval and an in the field sub - grade inspection by VDOT inspector prior to placement of any base stone. Subgrade density reports will also need to be available or test occurring the same day VDOT Inspector is on site. 10) Base stone will need to be inspected and depth checked prior to placement of any asphalt being placed. Also third party inspection reports will need to be available for review. Reports to be made available would be Roller Patterns and Density per the VDOT Manual of Instructions. 11) Concrete Testing is to be performed per VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications. 12) Signage locations to be marked prior to permanent installation. And pavement markings to be sketched out on asphalt with heavy chalk or lightly marked with white paint prior to placement of permanent markings. 13) WP -2 standard to be on plan set for all commercial entrances and will also be put in permit if not on plan set. 14) Replacement of all raised traffic markers and pavement markings that are disturbed during construction will be replaced or pavement markings refreshed for tie in back to existing road alignment from road improvements. 15) All existing VDOT signage impacted by road improvements will be reviewed prior to removal for temporary storage or temporarily located as required, but will not be removed by contractor until VDOT inspector has reviewed. Certain storage requirements for signage are required due to the reflective sheeting. Do not store signs face down or sheeting to sheeting. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone 434 296-5832 Fax 434 972-4126 November 11, 2016 Kent O'Donohue Balzer & Associates Inc. 1561 Commerce Road, Ste. 401 Verona, VA 24482 RE: ARB201600125 Timberland Park Apartments Dear Mr. O'Donohue, At its meeting on Monday, November 7, 2016, the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, by a vote of 4:0, voted to forward the following recommendations on the above -noted Initial Site Development Plan to the agent for the Site Review Committee: • Regarding requirements to satisfy the design guidelines as per § 18-30.6.4c (2), (3) and (5): None. • Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the guidelines: None. Regarding recommended conditions of initial plan approval: A Certificate of Appropriateness is required prior to final site plan approval. The following items shall be addressed in the final site plan submittal: I . Provide for review samples of the proposed building materials and colors. 2. Add trees at the north end of Building #3. 3. Add the standard window glass note to the architectural plans. Window glass in the Entrance Corridors shall meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should be submitted with the application for final review. 4. Show locations of proposed equipment and show how visibility will be eliminated. 5. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to the architectural drawings. "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." 6. Identify on the lighting plan the color proposed for the poles and fixtures. Bronze is recommended. 7. Reduce pole light height to 20 total, maximum. 8. Add the standard lighting note to the plan. "Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle." 9. Include a complete landscape plan and schedule with the next submittal. Show planting consistently throughout the plan set. 10. Provide a mix of large tree species along the EC side of the site. Intersperse ornamental trees among the Iarge shade trees. 11. Trees along Old Lynchburg Road shall be a minimum of 2'/2" caliper at planting. 12. Provide perimeter parking lot trees, 40' on center, 2%2" caliper at planting. 13. Add trees in the open area west of Building #3 to help soften the appearance of the wall. 14. Add the standard plant health note to the plan. "AIl site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant." • Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit: None. In addition, the board by a vote of 4:0, approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposal, pending staff administrative approval of the following conditions: 1. Provide for review samples of the proposed building materials and colors. 2. Add trees at the north end of Building #3. 3. Add the standard window glass note to the architectural plans. Window glass in the Entrance Corridors shall meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should be submitted with the application for final review. 4. Show locations of proposed equipment and show how visibility will be eliminated. 5. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to the architectural drawings. "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." 6. Identify on the lighting plan the color proposed for the poles and fixtures. Bronze is recommended. 7. Reduce pole light height to 20 total, maximum. 8. Add the standard lighting note to the plan. "Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle." 9. Include a complete landscape plan and schedule with the next submittal. Show planting consistently throughout the plan set. 10, Provide a mix of large tree species along the EC side of the site. Intersperse ornamental trees among the large shade trees. 11. Trees along Old Lynchburg Road shall be a minimum of 2%2" caliper at planting. 12. Provide perimeter parking lot trees, 40' on center, 2'/2" caliper at planting. 13. Add trees in the open area west of Building #3 to help soften the appearance of the wall. 14. Add the standard plant health note to the plan. "All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant." Please provide: 1. Two full sets of revised drawings addressing each of these conditions. Include updated ARB revision dates on each drawing. 2: A memo including detailed responses indicating how each condition has been satisfied. If changes other than those requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also. Highlighting the changes in the drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval. 3. The attached "Revised Application Submittal" form. This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. When staffs review of this information indicates that all conditions of approval have been met, a Certificate of Appropriateness may be issued. If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Margaret Maliszewski Principal Planner cc: Woodlands Properties III LLC 415 East Main Street Ste 301b Charlottesville VA 22902 File COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development REVISED APPLICATION SUBMITTAL This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. County staff has indicated below what they think will be required as a resubmission of revisions. If you need to submit additional information please explain on this form for the benefit of the intake staff. All plans must be collated and folded to fit into legal size files, in order to be accepted for submittal. TO: PROJECT NAME: DATE: Submittal Type Requiring Revisions () indicates submittai Code County Project Number # Copies Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (E&S Mitigation Plan P Waiver Regnest WR Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) Road Plan (RP) Private Road Request, with private/public com arison (PRR) Private Road Request — Development Area PRR-DA Preliminary Site Plan PSP Final Site Plan or amendment) (FSP) Final Plat (FP) Preliminary Plat (PP) Easement Plat (EP) Boundary Adjustment Plat (BAP) Rezoning Plan Z Special Use Permit Concept Plan SP -CP Reduced Concept Plan(R-CP) Proffers P Bond Estimate Request (BER) Draft Groundwater Management Plan (D-GWMP Final Groundwater Management PIan (F-GWMP Aquifer Testing Work Plan (ATWP) Groundwater Assessment Report (GWAR) Architectural Review Board ARB) ARB201600125 Other: Please explain (For staff use only) Submittal Code I # Co ies Distribute To: Submittal Code # Copies Distribute To: ARB 2 Margaret Maliszewski 11 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development`_ 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS - E911 APPLICATION#: SDP201600074 TMP: 07600-00-00-046BO DATE: 01/30/2017 FROM: Derek Bedarf dbedarf@albemarle.org Geographic Data Services (GDS) www.albemarle.org/qds (434) 296-5832 ext. 3031 This site will require a one (1) new private road name. Per Sec. 7-200-B of the County's Road Naming and Property Numbering Ordinance (Page 2 of PDF). "It is intended by this article that all roads within the county which serve or are designed to serve three (3) or more dwelling units or business structures shall be named." Please review the procedures in the Road Naming and Property Numbering Manual to decide upon a road name for the road accessing Old Lynchburg Road. We recommend providing three (3) candidate road names to our office for review, in case your first choices are not acceptable. A PDF version of the Ordinance and Manual can be found here: httDS://www.albemarle.ora/unload/imaaes/Forms Center/Departments/Geooraohic Data Service s/Forms/Road Namina and PrODerty Numberina Ordinance and Manual.Ddf Please consult the County's Road Name Index to check your road names prior to submittal. The Index can be found here: http://www.albemarle.org/albemarle/upload/images/webapps/roads/ Parcel and mapping information can be found here: http://gisweb.albemarle.org/ If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. SHERWOOD .z MANOR Esr.1971 Questions for the Site Review Committee regarding Timberland Park Apartments February 9th, 2017 10 am Room 235 County Office Building 1. Trees -what trees are coming down? Will there be trees between the development and Sherwood Manor? 2. Is the retaining wall visible from Sherwood or are the buildings recessed? How far is the wall from Sherwood Manor? 3. Is there a fence between the Development and Sherwood Manor? 4. Is there going to be a turn lane into the development? What are the plans for the increased traffic on Old Lynchburg Rd and at the 5th Street intersection? 5. The plans show a sidewalk across the Old Lynchburg Rd side of the property. Could they complete the sidewalk up to the existing sidewalk? 6. When does the clearing start? What is the estimated date of completion? 7. Is there going to be blasting or burning? 8. What is the plan to control the trash, construction debris and other items that blow around construction sites? 9. What about the run-off from the Woodlands and the run-off to the lower part of Sherwood? 10. Who do we contact when things don't go right (construction debris, mudslide, tree falls over, etc.)? bALZIZ2 ANC. ASSOCLATES INO . T REFLECTING TOMORROW December 09, 2016 County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Response to SDP Pre-application & ARB Comments Timberland Park Apartments Balzer Project No: 34160034 County Project No: SDP2016-053 This letter serves as our written responses to the County comments on the subject: Planning—Megan Yaniglos [32.4.1.3(a)] It appears that the maximum setback for the buildings does not apply due to the existing ACSA easement. However, this will need to be determined 4i1101°"' during initial site plan due to comments from ACSA regarding the upgrade of th( ' 9a sewer line. Due to the existing grade of the site and the existing location of sanitary we cannot move these buildings closer. We have coordinated with ACSA on the needed sanitary work and this is reflected in these plans. 32.4.1.3(b)] Buildings over 40 feet or the 3rd story require a 15 foot step back per ode section 4.19. Step back has been reflected in plans. 3. [32.4.1.3(d)] The steep slopes shown on the plan do not appear to match those slopes that are shown on the County GIS. The County Engineer will need to determine if the slopes surveyed showing less than 25% are more accurate than the GIS. A to r hibit showing the difference in slopes (GIS and survey) would r; ` ' Exhibit has been previously provided per email. It has also been provided with this submittal. The exhibit shows the limits of existing grades based on 25% slopes or greater. These__grades we field surveyed and areas of steep characteristics were surveyed in greater quantity to make sure we identified all PLANNERS ' ARCHITECTS ' ENGINEERS ' SURVEYORS ROANOKE 'RICHMOND `NEW RIVER VALLEY'SHENANDOAH VALLEY 1561 Commerce Road,Suite 401 'Verona,Virginia 24482 ' (540)248-3220•FAX(540)248-3221 0 r-*/; "1"-� Response to Connents �0 �� _ ) �/ Timberland Park Apartments Page 2 of S steep slopes accurately. On the plans we have not only shown areas that were identified on the County GIS but also those that we identified with field survey. Also, it should be noted that the area labeled "Preserved" on the GIS was actually surveyed as being larger based on field topo then what was recorded on GIS, we included this additional area as "Preserved" for your records. . L...,.,,..,..Jk.i1 ,, 1.1,4::%_ ,-;..,-(....:1L1 iL :.: iCA�t“-u, .:",,,_, - ,v ,s;,ttional information is provided. Clarify I` •ient, and if it has been recorded provide the deed book and page numbE DB & PG provided on plans. 5. [32.7.2.3] A side4,...:• _.,could be provided along Old Lynchburg Road Sidewalk added. 6. [4.16] Two tot lots need to be provided as described under this section of the Zoning Ordinance (size and equipment). If an exception from this rr'n"irrrnont is ', cir•,A ,-r- :i+r -, it ct fir--*i•r' ' '"':41 the initial site plan for review. Tot Lots added and a note of what should be included. 7. [32.4.1.3(q)] Portions of the site are within the Dam Break Inundation Zone and Will hn fnrwPrric,r1 to PCR for review when the initial site plan is submitted Noted. Dam break zone is shown on C2 and C5. VDOT — Adam Moore, P.E. 1. I urn lane analysis (right and left) are needeu Turn lane analysis and sight distance has been coordinated with VDOT. These exhibits were provided prior in email as well as with this submittal. Engineering— Matt Wentland 1. Grading in - , - -s appears to direct the runoff to are-, "rith rn irl tr '„d r 'i'"$' building' All inlets, flumes, foundation inlets and ditches and grading elevations are now provided on plans. 2. The gradin, liould he at least ' from the nrnr'erty line or a temporary grading easement should be acquired. Grading has been adjusted to be 5' from property line. 3. Retaining wall plans may be needed to show wall construction will not encroach on preserved slopes and neighboring property. Due to further coordination with ARB and ACSA and VDOT as well as these comments the plans have been taken to a more complete stage of development. With that said, retaining walls have been changed slightly or added or some removed. If there are any walls in particular that are of concern please let us know and we can provide further detail. We have provided a typical wall detail on C13 as well as a more in depth grading plan. 4. provide a pruiiie ui the L'IlLidlitx Profile provided on C3. 5. Although the storm system is cuiucepluai, ii, aNNeGi:, chore controls may be necessary to prevent the flow depths from topping the curbs and the spreads from going too far outside of PLANNERS ' ARCHITECTS ' ENGINEERS ' SURVEYORS ROANOKE 'RICHMOND 'NEW RIVER VALLE) SHENANDOAH VALLEY 1561 Commerce Road,Suite 401 ' Verona,Virginia 24482 ' (540)248-3220 • FAX(540)248-3221 r..r� Response to Comments Timberland Park Apartments Page 3 of 5 the parking or too far into the travel ways. Further development of storm system has been performed and additional structures have been added. Calculations have been provided with this submittal. ARB — Margaret Maliszewski Before ARB Meeting Comments ndscape buffer may need to be revised to satisfy ARB conditions of approval. Plants revised. 2. Buildings are not oriented parallel to the EC, as is required by the guider— visibility uider =visibility from the FC rr `!r""-r thE' ffin-,r+-rr , of orientation in this case Screening and vegetation has been added to reduce this affect. 3. If the BMP is visible from the EC, the engineered feature will need to be revi—d +n landscape feature that is visually integrated into the !Hnccr--r, The lower BMP features will consist of a grassed weir which will integrate with the surroundings. The upper BMP will have structural components such as a riser and dome grate top, however due to elevation, distance from EC, and them being 1' lower than the berm this should not be visible from the EC. 4. EL guidelines state that "site grading should maintain the basic relationship of the site to surrounding conditions by limiting the use of retaining walls and sloping the terrain through the use of smooth, rounded land forms that blend with the existing terrain. Steep cut or fill sections are generally unacceptable." The proposal does not appear to meet this guideline. Reduced visibility from the EC can reduce the emphasis placed on this guideline in this case. Noted. 5. It would be helpful to have the following information to facilitate ARB review of the proposal:-,, a. Site sections to cl• anticipated visibility of the development from the 1-64 Entrance Corridor Provided. b. Include on the site i.IIL location of the 164 edge of pavemen^ Provided. c. Include on the grading plan the topography in the 164 right-of-wa Provided. ARB Meeting Comments dol_. Provided at meeting for review. Please let us know if you need further samples. 2. Add trees at the north end of Building#. Trees added. 3. Add the standard window glass note to the architectural plans. Window glass in the Entrance Corridors shall meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT)shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR)shall not exceed 30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should be submitted with the application for final review Note will be added to Arch plans. 4. 'I be elin ec' Mechanical units now shown and screening shown on LA plan. As discussed, further foundation plantings will be done, however this general theme will remain, 36" tall PLANNERS ' ARCHITECTS ' ENGINEERS ' SURVEYORS ROANOKE 'RICHMOND 'NEW RIVFP tin!!E SHENANDOAH VALLEY 1561 Commerce Road, Suite 401 ' Verona,Virginia 24482 ' (540)248-3220 • FAX(540)248-3221 Response to Comments Timberland Park Apartments Page 4 o f 5 evergreen shrubs around the mechanical units. • 5. 1-wo Lite s".oiluaiu $iuw Lu the architectural drawings. "Visibility of all mechanical equipmi from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." Note will be added to Arch plans. 6. Identify on the rig plan )r the r . _ ,,, , n, . ' Note added to Lighting Plan that Dark Bronze Textured finish must be used for all fixtures. 7. Reduce pole light height to 20 total, maximum. Pole height reduced to 20'. 8. Add the standard lighting note to the plan. "Each uuiuuui Iuii-illlatie equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle." Note added to Lighting plan. ,_:.,_.; Show planting 9. Include a con1N;�=� i4,tuai,ui.,_ j.,iui. �,�Li SC' ' consistently throughout the plan se! Plan and schedule added with required landscaping. 10. Provide a mix of large tree species along the EC side of the site. Intersperse ornamental trees among the large shade trees. Mix of large trees added and ornamentals. 11. Trees along Old Lynchburg Road shah u� G = =i .===iu+i= ut 2Y2" L. Noted. 12. Provide perimeter parking lot trees, 40' on center, 2Y2" caliper at planting. Added. 13. Add trees in the open area west of Building#3 to help soften the appearance of the wall. Trees added. 14. Add the standard plant health note to the plan. "All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrub' vlally and only to support the overall health of the plant Note added to landscape plan. Fire Rescue– Robbie Gilmer 1. Buildings over 3n' in height renuire a 26' access aisle that is no more than 30' from thr building. As discussed, height of 3rd floor will be at 28'6". Also, an auto turn exhibit had previously been provided via email based on Counties largest truck for review of maneuverability of site. ACSA–Alex Morrison 1. The sewer main along the frontage of the -' to be relocated +,. —1,7,-- require !, .-require ' r at the 1' Coordination has been made with ACSA and other developer to allow for adequate cover and modification of downstream inverts. 2. [., Hydrants Hydrants and FDC's added. Also a Fire Flow Model has been performed and provided with this submittal. PLANNERS ' ARCHITECTS ' ENGINEERS ' SURVEYORS ROANOKE ' RICHMOND 'NEW RIVER 1'n!I F SHENANDOAH VALLEY 1561 Commerce Road,Suite 401 ' Verona,Virginia 24482 ' (540)248-3220 • FAX(540)248-3221 'tome 'swot Response to Comments Timberland Park Apartments Page 5 ors Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, BALZER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. D. Kent O'Donohue, LA Project Designer PLANNERS ' ARCHITECTS . ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS ROANOKE • RICHMOND •NEW RIVER VALI F`' SHENANDOAH VALLEY 1561 Commerce Road,Suite 401 •Verona,Virginia 24482 • (540)248-3220• FAX(540)248-3221 '`tere ,,,' 1- Z COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road,North Wing Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4126 September 21, 2016 Kent O'Donohue Balzer&Associates, Inc ((( 1561 Commerce Road, Suite 401 Verona, VA 82 dos . o e(a?balzer.cc\ RE:SDP2016-053 Ti ' , and Park Apartments- Preapplication Plan Mr. O'Donohue: Your preapplication submittal has been reviewed and comments are provided below. These comments do not constitute a final review of your project. The Agent has made a good faith effort to determine compliance with the requirements of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and to identify all deficiencies. It is possible that during the formal review of your application that additional comments may be generated. Failure to identify a deficiency during preapplication review does not relieve the project from compliance with Chapter 18 of the Code. In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.1.4 of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle the agent has reviewed the above referenced preapplication plan and has the following comments: Compliance with zoning. The proposed use and density DOES comply with the Chapter 18 of the Code. Required changes. The following changes are required for the plan to comply with Chapter 18 of the Code, special exception,or code of development: [32.4.1.3(a)] It appears that the maximum setback for the buildings does not apply due to the existing ACSA easement. However, this will need to be determined during initial site plan due to comments from ACSA regarding the upgrade of the sewer line. [32.4.1.3(b)] Buildings over 40 feet or the 3rd story require a 15 foot step back per code t61,3\\._/ section 4.19. 3. [32.4.1.3(d)] The steep slopes shown on the plan do not appear to match those slopes that are shown on the County GIS. The County Engineer will need to determine if the slopes surveyed showing less than 25% are more accurate than the GIS. A to scale exhibit showing the difference in slopes (GIS and survey) would be helpful. 4. [32.4.1.3(i)] A buffer easement is labeled, however no additional information is provided. Clarify this easement, and if it has been recorded provide the deed book and page number. 5. [32.7.2.3] A sidewalk should be provided along Old Lynchburg Road. 6. [4.16] Two tot lots need to be provided as described under this section of the Zoning Ordinance (size and equipment). If an exception from this requirement is desired, provide a justification with the initial site plan for review. 7. [32.4.1.3(q)] Portions of the site are within the Dam Break Innundation Zone and will be forwarded to DCR for review when the initial site plan is submitted. —f,„„ �. Virginia Department of Transportation (Adam Moore): 1. Turn lane analysis (right and left) are needed. Engineering (Matt Wentland): 1. Grading in some areas appears to direct the runoff to areas with no inlets and towards buildings. 2. The grading should be at least 5' from the property line or a temporary grading easement should be acquired. 3. Retaining wall plans may be needed to show wall construction will not encroach on preserved slopes and neighboring property. 4. Provide a profile of the entrance. 5. Although the storm system is conceptual, it appears more controls may be necessary to prevent the flow depths from topping the curbs and the spreads from going too far outside of the parking or too far into the travelways. Architectural Review (Margaret Maliszewski): 1. Plants shown in the 10' landscape buffer may need to be revised to satisfy ARB conditions of approval. 2. Buildings are not oriented parallel to the EC, as is required by the guidelines. Reduced visibility from the EC can reduce the importance of orientation in this case. 3. If the BMP is visible from the EC, the engineered feature will need to be revised to look like a landscape feature that is visually integrated into the surrounding landscape. 4. EC guidelines state that "site grading should maintain the basic relationship of the site to surrounding conditions by limiting the use of retaining walls and sloping the terrain through the use of smooth, rounded land forms that blend with the existing terrain. Steep cut or fill sections are generally unacceptable." The proposal does not appear to meet this guideline. Reduced visibility from the EC can reduce the emphasis placed on this guideline in this case. 5. It would be helpful to have the following information to facilitate ARB review of the proposal: a. Site sections to clarify anticipated visibility of the development from the 1-64 Entrance Corridor. b. Include on the site plans the location of the 164 edge of pavement. c. Include on the grading plan the topography in the 164 right-of-way. Fire/Rescue (Robbie Gilmer): 1. Buildings over 30' in height require a 26' access aisle that is no more than 30' from the building. ACS�al/, ex Morrison): 1. 'Tr e sewer main along the frontage of the property will need to be relocated to achieve the required cover at the proposed entrance. 2. Show fire hydrants and-FDCs. Additional information. The following information is required to be submitted with your site plan application: - Application http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community Dev eiopment/forms/applications/Site Plan - Application Initial Site Plan & Checklist.pdf Staff has provided references to provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code. The Code is kept up to date by the County Attorney's office. The Code may found on the County Attorney's website which may be found under "Departments and Services" at Albemarle.org. Sincerely, / Megan Yaniglos, AICP Principal Planner Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:25 AM To: jensurber@surberdev.com' Cc: Margaret Maliszewski; Ron Higgins; 'Liz Russell'; 'Plaster, Shelly (VDOT)' Subject: Pre app follow-up Attachments: Dam Break Inundation Zones_SOP.DOC;TMP 76-46B Woodlands site plan Proposed.pdf Jen, It was nice meeting with you and Brian yesterday to discuss your proposal located on TMP 07600-00-00-046B0.Those in attendance: VDOT(shelly Plaster),Ron Higgins of Zoning,Margaret Maliszewski of ARB,and myself-Christopher Perez of Planning. As promised, below I am providing Liz Russel of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation's contact information lrussell(a,monticello.org She can help guide you on the roof colors that are acceptable as this proposal is located in the Monticello View Shed. Also let this email serve as a brief summary of some of the discussions from yesterday's pre app. 1)As discussed the proposal would come in as an Initial Site Plan and go through Site Review Committee(SRC)review. The submittal schedule can be found at: http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/Community_Development/forms/schedules/Site_Plan Subdivision_&_Tier II Wireless Schedule.pdf A link to the application is provided below. The fee has changed from that which is depicted on the application, it is truly $1,290 now. htt•://www.albemarle.or'/u•load/ima.es/forms center/de•artments/Communit Develo•ment/forms/a••lications/Initial Site_Plan_Application_& Checklist.pdf After the initial site plan is approved a Final Site Plan would be required to come in for final review,along with WPO plan and ARB plans. 2)ARB will need to review/approve this proposal prior to final site plan approval as it is in the Entrance Corridor(EC). If you have any questions about the ARB guidelines please contact Margaret Maliszewski, MMaliszewskiAalbemarle.org 434.296.5832 ext. 3276 / 40-tbacks for this zoning are guided by Section 4.19(non infill). Please utilize this section of the ordinance when the wildingis beingmoved closer to the street. Also movingthe building closer to the street also conforms to the"�"-- Neighborhood Model Principles which we discussed/I provided you a handout on. 4)ACSA seemed to have a fairly substantial comment on the W/S capacity in that area and the need to upsize the sewer line downstream(see hardcopy email given to you at the meeting from ACSA staff). 5) Sidewalks will be expected to be provided along the frontage of the property. ✓moi,e 5 6)VDOT—provided comments that the left and right inner section needs to be met for sight distance. -locate the entrance directly across from"Old Lynchburg Place"or 200' offset. -Turn Lane Warrants(Right and Left) -R/W dedication is requested -Commercial Entrance see appendix F. 1 (14 7)Ad itionally it appears this development will be subject to Recreational Regulations per Section 4.16 of County Code.' Ple e assure you review this section of code provided below and provide for such improvements on the initial site plan. p://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms Center/Departments/County Attorney/Forms/Albemarle Count y Code Ch18 Zoning04 General Regulations.pdf 8)Portions of this site are within the State Dam Break Inundation Zone(DBIZ).Thus the applicant must show the DBIZ on the initial and final site plan.Attached is County staff internal guidance(Standard Operating Procedures) for properties located in this zone.Rob VanLier is the contact person at DCR that we'd forward the plans to if the proposal was determined to affect the DBIZ.From previous discussions with him they are only interested in reviewing proposed "development"that falls within the DBIZ. The main concern is keeping new structures out of the DBIZ, so even a lot that falls within the DBIZ would not necessarily be of concern so long as the building site is out of the area.He said if there is ever any question about whether or not DCR should review something, feel free to send him an email at robert.vanlierAdcr.va.gov. He's also pretty responsive by phone(434)244-0653.Thus when relocating the structure to address setbacks and Neighborhood Model Principles,assure proposed structures remain outside of the DBIZ. Map of property with DBIZ layer. http://gisweb.albemarle.org/Map/Viewenaspx?state=954509198557 Below I offer the following sections of the ordinance-Chapter 18(site plans),as it related to the property being partially in the DBIZ if it is determined by Rob VanLier that it's applicable. Dam break inundation zone:The term"dam break inundation zone"means the area downstream of a dam that would be inundated or otherwise directly affected by the failure of a dam that has been mapped as provided in Virginia Code§10.1-606.2.(Added 1-1-14) Development:The term"development,"as used in regulations pertaining to dam break inundation zones,means one or more lots developed or to be developed as a unit under single ownership or unified control which is to be used for any business or industrial purpose or is to contain three or more dwelling units,but does not include any lot or lots that will be principally devoted to agricultural production.(Added 1-1-14) 32.4.2.8 EFFECT AN APPROVED INITIAL SITE PLAN HAS ON CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS AND EARLY OR MASS GRADING An approved initial site plan affects the following pending and future approvals: a.Issues pertaining to a certificate of appropriateness.An approved initial site plan that has complied with the architectural review board's requirements identified under section 32.4.2.2(b) shall be deemed to be consistent with the applicable design guidelines pertaining to the elements of sections 30.6.4(c)(2),(3)and(5)delineated in section 32.4.2.2(b)(1). b.Early or mass grading.On any site within a conventional or planned development district,regardless of whether the site is also within an entrance corridor overlay district,early or mass grading may be approved under chapter 17,subject to the following:(i)no grading permit,building permit,or other permit shall be issued and no land disturbing activity may begin until the developer satisfies the requirements of sections 17-414 through 17-717;provided that land disturbing activity may occur prior to approval of a stormwater management plan if the activity was previously covered under the general permit,as that term is defined in chapter 17,issued by the Commonwealth on July 1,2009;(ii)the developer has satisfied the conditions of approval identified by the agent in the letter required by section 32.4.2.5(d);and(iii)any site within a dam break inundation zone is subiect to section 32.8.7. (This section reference appears to be a typo in the ordinance,seems this should be 32.8.6) 32.5.6 DAM BREAK INUNDATION ZONES If the proposed development is located wholly or partially within a dam break inundation zone,the site review committee shall review the initial site plan as follows:(i)it shall review the dam break inundation zone map on file with the county for the affected impounding structure;(ii)notify the dam owner about the proposed development;and(iii)within ten(10)days after the application is deemed complete,send a written request to the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation to make a determination of the potential impacts of the proposed development on the spillway design flood standards required for the dam as provided in Virginia Code§10.1-606.3. 32.6.4 DAM BREAK INUNDATION ZONES;ENGINEERING STUDY AND MAPPING INFORMATION If the proposed development is located wholly or partially within a dam break inundation zone,the developer shall submit with the final site plan the following: a.Engineering study.If the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation determines that a plan of development proposed by a developer would change the spillway design flood standards of an impounding structure pursuant to Virginia Code§10.1-606.3,the developer shall submit an engineering study in conformance with the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board's standards under the Virginia Dam Safety Act in Virginia Code§10.1-604 et seq.and the Virginia Impounding Structure regulations in 4VAC50-20-10 et seq.The engineering study shall be reviewed and acted upon by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation as provided in Virginia Code§15.2-2243.1. b.Mapping information.The developer shall provide the dam owner,the county,and any other affected localities with information necessary for the dam owner to update the dam break inundation zone map to reflect any new development within the dam break inundation zone following completion of the development. (Ord.13-18(7),12-4-13,effective 1-1-14;Ord.15-18(5),7-8-15) 32.8.6 DAM BREAK INUNDATION ZONES;PREREQUISITE TO DEVELOPMENT Following the completion of the engineering studies in accordance with Virginia Code§15.2-2243.1(A)and the determination by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation that the developer's plan of development would change the spillway design flood standards of the impounding structure,before any development within a dam break inundation zone: a.Payment for portion of necessary upgrades.The developer shall pay fifty(50)percent of the contract-ready costs for necessary upgrades to an impounding structure attributable to the development,together with an administrative fee not to exceed one(1)percent of the total amount of payment required or one thousand dollars($1,000.00),whichever is less.Any payments shall be made to the Dam Safety,Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund held by the Virginia Resources Authority pursuant to Virginia Code§10.1-603.19:1."Necessary upgrades" do not include costs associated with routine operation,maintenance,and repair,nor do they include repairs or upgrades to the impounding structure not made necessary by the proposed development;or b.Redesign the development.The developer shall amend the site plan so that it does not alter the spillway design flood standards required of the impounding structure. (Ord.13-18(7),12-4-13,effective 1-1-14) Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 2 %woo NOW I \ mm ig 1—' - iffkii f1 \� 4.+y, 4. is ;` 6a ek1111 f g < E d g 4 m m 6 oggil lc 1 t4, $ 1° ,q. o€R93,707 .4-2c as o Q «cat G U . IV* 41 ' ter. 'll I1Jk ' p�,,�r i w. � 0 g ate 80 3 «['a « ,f�,q�`�y(//-4'fa ` I!�'f'+ 2 BR TYP'C 1 BR TYPE C ` Q �� ,.°'"' • isle, --_--EX11 s 4 PlwdilL t s Oft Ain �- �,,[I i V ' III / _ L •41M.• �oin �,�s{T- a1 r. ci\ mi 11111 LiIrig P c<,��v � ,=-- --� � ,,,,.,.,:k. O. "+ e is t` © �-�' 1 - WM arft- Lill o Ark i g lid' I w x o.nt as .. I L__ I 4. I 'AI • m pI 'tilui , col All,• m . r ip 1... g la H ° MIME SHIM 4.1 Om _1ird,�, — Liki se � ----Li'l 2BR TYPE C 2BR TYPE C D '13y = 'fi m 2 JA Jon ess Archiittecture,PLIC P, �o yy�� AI( TR ONSTRUCTION a ,«C„�, CD R$ - Z zi —I C