HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800009 Approval - County 2018-05-04COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
May 4, 2018
Scott Collins
Collins Engineering
200 Garrett Street, Suite K
Charlottesville, VA 22902
SDP2018-9 Belvedere Phase IVA - Initial Site Plan
Mr. Collins,
The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative conditional approval to the above referenced
site plan. This approval shall be valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of this letter, provided that the
developer submits a final site plan for all or a portion of the site within one (1) year after the date of this letter as
provided in section 32.4.3.1 of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and thereafter diligently pursues
approval of the final site plan.
In accordance with Chapter 18 Section 32.4.2.8 Early or Mass Grading may be permitted after the following
approvals are received:
1. Engineering approval of a VSMP plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the County
of Albemarle.
2. Approval of all easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control.
3. Submittal of a tree conservation checklist with areas for tree preservation identified.
The final site plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the following items are received:
1. A final site plan that satisfies all of the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
2. A fee of $1,613.
Please submit 13 copies of the final plans to the Community Development Department. The assigned Lead
Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies. Once you receive the first set of comments on the
final site plan, please work with each reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements.
The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature until
tentative approvals for the attached conditions from the following agencies/reviewers have been obtained:
SRC Members:
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) - 2 copies [Paty Saternye ext. 32501
Albemarle County Planning Services (Zoning) — 1 copy [Francis MacCall ext. 3418]
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) - 1 copy [Frank Pohl ext. 7914]
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) - 1 copies [Kevin McDermott ext. 3414]
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) - 1 copy [Elise Kiewra ext. 3030]
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - 1 copy [Shawn Maddox 434-326-2623]
Virginia Department of Transportation - 1 copy [Adam Moore 434-422-9894]
Albemarle County Building inspections — 1 copy [Michael Dellinger ext. 3228]
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) - 3 copy [Richard Nelson 434-977-4511 ]
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) - 1 copy [Victoria Fort 434-977-2970 ext. 205]
If you have any questions about these conditions or the submittal requirements please feel free to contact me at
Extension 3250, psatemye@albemarle.org.
Sincerely
Se or P1
1
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434-296-5832
Memorandum
To: Scott Collins
From: Paty Saternye, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: April 19, 2018
UPDATE: May 4, 2018
Subiect: SDP201800009 Belvedere Phase IVA — Initial Site Plan
Fax 434-972-4126
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the following
comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time.
Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.): [Each comment is preceded by
the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.]
Comments to be addressed Drior to the Initial Site Plan aoDroval:
1. Pay the required notices fee of $215.
UPDATE: Comment addressed.
Comments to be addressed with the Final Site Plan submission:
2. A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
3. ZMA2004-7] Split zoning. Staff strongly recommends against creating split zoned lots. It's recommended that the final
plat and final site plan be modified to develop single zoned lots. However, Lots 236 — 244 and Lot 229 are sufficient as
proposed being the split zoning does not appear to impact the proposed buildings. Please assure the proposed buildings
are outside of the NMD area.
Note that lots 209 and 228, which are not part of this site plan, could be greatly impacted by the split zoning. Although
those split zoned lots will be counted towards the NMD unit counts the plan and plat will have to demonstrate the
proposed uses, setbacks, and code of development standards can be met in each district for the lots created. With the
submission that will include lots 209 and 228 the zoning, proposed use, and density on the cover page will have to be
updated to provide this information.
4. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] General Information. Access to Mr. Jacob Levenson's property (TMP 62-2A) shall be maintained
throughout the entire project. Provide the access easement that replaces the portion of the driveway and access
easement that is being vacated.
5. [32.8.2] In improvement plans. All infrastructure required to construct phase 4A shall be review, approved,
and built or bonded before the final plat and/or final site plan can be approved. This includes all offsite improvements
required to serve the development, including road plans, WPO plan, water and sewer connections which are part of
phase 2B.
[SP2007-54 condition of approval #6, 32.5.2(b),] Soccer field parking. The applicant shall demonstrate as a
condition of final site plan approval that the on -site parking provided for the use, including on -site on -street parking,
is adequate for the proposed use. The project limits do not include the area proposed for the soccer field as approved in
SP2007-54; however, the on street parking along Belvedere Boulevard and Fowler Street are required parking for the
use. Revise parking calculations to designate and account for the on street parking provided to the soccer field use.
Either provide on street parking along both sides of Fowler Street, for its full length, or provide a parking plan that
shows how the SOCA parking requirements will be met through a combination of on -site and on -street parking without
adversely impacting the parking of the residential development. It is important to note that all SOCA required parking
that cannot be met by on -street parking, without adversely impacting the parking within the Belvedere neighborhood
(both within and outside of the NMD area) will be required to be met within the SOCA site/parcel itself.
UPDATE: Comment still valid. Address comment above. Additional information was provided on 4/26/18 and
will be evaluated either prior to or with the final site plan. Additional on street parking on Fowler Street may
still be required.
7. [32.5.2(b), 32.5.2(n), 4.12.6] Parking. Provide the required parking for the site plan. See above about the SOCA
parking requirements. Also, address the parking within the individual parking. It appears that many of the s do not
have sufficient area to hold two vehicles, but the parking calculations state that two vehicles will be parked in each lot.
Ensure there is sufficient parking for the site plan and that the calculations accurately represent what parking is
available.
[32.5.1(c)(1) & 32.6.1(e)(1)] The NMD zoning division line does not appear to be shown correctly in the site plan in
the vicinity of the dividing line with Block 10 of Belvedere. It is also not shown in the same place as it was in an
exhibit for a recent variation request (for open space). Address the following:
• Ensure that the NMD line is correctly shown.
• Ensure that there are no split zoned parcels.
UPDATE: Clarification on comment. In order to avoid complication with zoning and building setbacks avoid
split zoned parcels if possible.
• Know that split zoned parcels will necessitate the residential unit being counted toward the Belvedere maximum
residential units per block.
• Note that some of the area which may incorrectly be shown as part of the R-4 area was shown in the ZMA
application plan as required open space.
• Please note that zoning is currently evaluating the NMD line and hopes to have more information to you soon.
UPDATE: Comment still valid. Address bulleted items specified above. Please note the following:
• Additional information was provided on 4/26/18 but was not sufficient to clarify the NMD line location
issue. This is still under review by zoning.
• The issue with the NMD line will be finalized before or during the final site plan process and the final
site plan will not be approved until it meets all requirements and codes based on that finalized NMD
line location.
• Since the analysis of the interpretation of the zoning line is in process zoning would like to meet to ao
over that analysis.
• Be aware that the density, parcels and number of units shown in this Initial Site Plan may not be
possible once the correct location of the NMD line is delineated.
• Cluster developments in an R-4 zone cannot utilize opens space in a different zone. Therefore, if the
NMD line shifts in such a way that the R-4 zoned open space is decreases additional area of open space,
within the R-4 zone will need to be provided to meet the same density shown.
[15.4] Bonus Factors & Environmental standards. It appears insufficient area of preserved wooded areas is shown on
the site plan. Address the following:
• 10% percent of the "site" is required, which would be 0.84 acres. Revise the plan to include sufficient area of
existing woods to be maintained.
• A conservation plan is required as specified in 15.4.1. Provide all of the requirements of the conservation
plan in the site plan.
• Clearly delineate the area of preserved trees and ensure that the meet the proper criteria for being utilized for
the Bonus Factors environmental standards.
UPDATE: Comment still valid. Address bulleted items specified above. In addition be aware of the following:
• If insufficient preserved wooded area is not proved and/or not conserved as required the bonus density
may not be allowed.
• Once the NMD line is finalized (see above) that may impact the area that has been shown for the
preserved wooded areas and the bonus factor.
10. [Comment] The Rivanna Trail head and portions of the trail are currently located on the subject property. On the site
plan depict its current location and where the trail head will be relocated. Is there an easement for the existing trail? Per
discussions with the property owner there is a written agreement with the Rivanna Trail which allows the trail to be
located on the property until the property owner no longer allows it to be on the property. Provide this documentation
for review/verification prior to approval of the final site plan/final plat.
11. [32.5.2(a)] General Information. To clearly distinguish the project limits for phase 4A remove lot designations/labels
from all lots in phase 213 and label phase 213 "to be approved under separate cover" throughout the plans.
12. [32.5.2(a)] Vicinity map. The subdivision is a phased subdivision, revise the vicinity map to depict all other phases of
the subdivision for which a final plat has been approved, in detail adequate to describe the location of the property
without field review. Also, label and depict phase 213 as it is required to be approved prior to the approval of phase 4A.
Also, provide existing property lines in phase 4A.
13. [32.5.2(c)] Phasing lines. Provide a note specifying that the phasing and timing of the development is after the
development of Phase IIB. Clearly delineate what improvements are proposed with this site plan and what is to be
approved with other phases and submissions, such as Belvedere Phase IIB.
UPDATE: Comment still valid. Address the comment above. Also, add a note that specifically state what
phase(s) must be built prior to this site plan being built since it depends upon the previous approved plan or plat
for infrastructure.
14. [Comment] The street sections provided in the final site plan shall match those in the approved road plans (once
submitted, reviewed, and approved). Ensure street sections are sufficient for all required parking. See comment above
on parking for SOCA SP. Also, see comments from Fire Rescue and Kevin McDermott.
15. [32.5.1, 32.5.2(a), 4.19] Yards. On sheet ensure the full description for the setbacks is provided. The descriptions for
setbacks when sidewalks are outside of the right of way has been truncated on the site plan.
Front
Minimum - 5 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside of the right-of-
way
Maximum — 25 feet
Garage
Minimum - Front loading garage: 18 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is
outside of the right-of-way
Side loading garage: 5 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside of the
right-of-way
Maximum - None
Side
Minimum - None; see Non-Infill Building Separation
Maximum — None
Non-Infill Building Separation
Minimum - 10 feet
Maximum — None
Rear
Minimum — 20 feet
Maximum — None
UPDATE: Comment still valid. Address the comment above as well as the following:
• Revise the setbacks graphically shown on the site plan to match the required setbacks. There are manv
setback lines, on the fronts, sides and rear of both the SFD and SFA lots that do not appear to meet the
minimum setback requirements. Please revise the setbacks shown or discuss the setbacks with the
planning reviewer.
• There is no side setback. However it appears that the site plan shows a setback on the single family
detached units. Revise the side setbacks or discuss the setback with the planning reviewer. If it is
meant to represent the minimum building separation label it as such instead of as "setback".
If the hatched area within each lot is not meant to be setback but is instead meant to be "buildable
area" then label it as such and provide that information in the legend specified in another comment.
16. [32.5.2(b), 32.5.2(n), 32.5.1(c)] Dimensions. On the plan depict and dimension all proposed improvements, including
buildings, driveways, and garages. This includes the single family detached lots. Since they have been included in this
site plan the level of detail and information provided must be at the same level as the single family attached lots shown
on the plan.
17. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Alleys. Where alleys are authorized, driveways shall be provided only from the alley. On the plan
depict, label, and dimension the driveways for each lot. Ensure all driveways, off of alley and off of streets, are
capable of holding 2 cars. At this time it appears a significant number of the driveways are below 18' wide and could
not hold 2 vehicles. If the driveways are not widened address the reduced number of on lot parking spaces in the
parking calculation.
18. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Alleys. On the plan provide a note that states no public agency, including VDOT, and the County
of Albemarle will be responsible for maintaining the alleys. Provide information on whether the alleys in phase IV -A
will be maintained by the Belvedere HOA or by a separate HOA. Please work with Planning, Engineering, and
Fire/Rescue to establish approvable alley widths. See the County Attorney's office comments on whether the existing
HOA agreement is sufficient for ownership and maintenance of the alleys that are not in the NMD area.
19. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(b), 32.5.2(i)] Information regarding the proposed use. Provide the acreages for the residue of each
parcel. The residue acreage shall also be provided in a chart on the cover sheet.
20. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] General Information. Revise the labeling of Fowler Street to "proposed" public street, as this road
is not existing.
21. [32.5.2(a), 32.5.2(i)] Existing or platted streets. Label all streets and alleys as either existing or proposed. Provide
directional arrows on each alley to signify one way or two way traffic.
22. [32.5.2(k)] Private & public easements. Provide the location and dimension of all existing and proposed private and
public easements. Show the existing easements on the adjoining property that are, or will be, connecting to the onsite
existing and proposed easements. Note that in addition to other possible easement there appears to be the need for
offsite easements, access easements, construction and grading easements, landscaping easements and sidewalk
easements.
23. [32.5.2(a)] Zoning. Revise the zoning to include Airport Impact Area (AIA).
24. [32.5.2(b)] Dedication of open space. Provide the following note: "Open Space is hereby dedicated to the HOA. "
Provide information on whether the open space in phase 4A will be maintained by the Belvedere HOA or by a separate
HOA. See County Attorney office's comments in reference to the use of the existing Belvedere HOA agreement and
the need for supplemental agreements. Ensure that the open space will be owned and maintained by an HOA.
25. [32.7.4.2, 32.5.2(k)] Easements for stormwater management facilities. Depict, label, and dimension access easement to
the stormwater management facility.
26. [32.5.20)] Drainage Easements. On the plan depict, dimension, and label all drainage easements as either public or
private.
27. [32.5.2(n)] Existing and proposed improvements. Revise the existing vegetation note on sheet 1 to accurately reflect
the existing vegetation onsite. Also, on the existing conditions sheet depict the existing treeline and label the type of
trees (evergreen, deciduous, or a mix of both). Also, show areas where existing vegetation will be removed.
28. [32.6.20)] Landscape plan. A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 is required with the final site plan.
29. [32.7.9.4(b)] Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials in order to satisfy the landscaping
and screening requirements of section 32.7.9, subject to the agent's approval. If you intend to use existing trees to
satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the following:
1. Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall show the trees to be preserved,
the limits of clearing, the location and type of protective fencing, grade changes requiring tree wells or walls,
and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing.
2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to ensure that
the specified trees will be protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent
in a particular case, the checklist shall conform to the specifications in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment
Control Handbook, pages III-393 through III-413, and as hereafter amended.
30. [Comment] An instrument assuring the perpetual maintenance of the alleys, the stormwater management facility, the
open space areas, and any other improvements that are to be maintained by the HOA in perpetuity. County Attorney
approval is required.
UPDATE: Comment still valid. Address the comment above. This also applies to the improvements to the cul-
de-sac that are outside of the proposed public right of way. All road improvements, sidewalks, and landscaping
must be shown to be maintained in perpetuity. Countv Attornev approval is reuuired prior to final plat
approval.
31. [Comment] See the other SRC reviewer comments attached. All SRC reviewer comments must be sufficiently
address prior to final site plan approval.
32. [UPDATE: NEW Comment [4.1611 Provide the required recreational area. Since this development is over 30
units, and also it is not a "conventional development", recreational areas are required. Ensure all recreational
areas are accessible to pedestrians and service vehicles.
33. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Ensure all retaining walls are no more than 6' in height and provide a label
specifying the maximum wall height on all proposed walls.
34. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Revise the existing conditions sheet so that the information is clear and correct.
Address the following:
• Do not show proposed property lines on the Existing Conditions Sheet.
• Correctly show existing parcel lines for the subject parcel and the adjoining parcels. There are two
places where the boundary lines of the parcel do not agree with the approved SUB2017-173 boundary
line adjustment (BLA). One is in the upper left hand corner of the project area, where a property line
is not shown. The other is near the bottom middle of the page where a property line is shown but was
vacated in the previously approved BLA.
• Because the "Limits of Phase IIB" and proposed property lines are shown in the existing conditions
sheet the existing parcel cannot be distinguished. Either find a way to more clearly show the "Limits of
Phase IIB" on the existing conditions sheet or move it to a different sheet of the site plan.
• Show the TMP # for TMP 62-213 in the portion that is to be residue and clearly delineate where new
property lines are being proposed (in a different sheet).
35. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] If any improvements are proposed on TMP 62A3-1 include it in the project and
site date with all required information.
36. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Remove anv reference to "Approved with Phase IIB" on the site plan or add "To
Be" to the label ("To Be Approved with Phase IIB"). Also, address the following:
• Note that Phase IIB has not been approved, it has only gone through the preliminary subdivision plat
process, the road plan has not been approved and a final site plan has not been submitted.
• There are water line and sanitary lines, near the intersection of Fowler Street and Farrow Drive that
state "Approved with Phase IIB". Clarify on which plan these are proposed and do not specify them as
"approved".
37. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Provide the same level of detail about the lots and the proposed building for the
Single Family Detached (SFD) lot as is required on the Single Family Attached (SFA) lots. When incorporated
in a site plan the SFD lots must show the same level and type of detail.
38. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Provide a legend for the hatched area and ensure that not only it is clearly labeled
as to what the hatch represents but also that the same hatch is not utilized for different things. The open space
area appears to have the same hatch pattern as many other types of area on the site plan.
39. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Ensure that all proposed uses and improvements meet the managed and preserved
slope requirements.
40. [UPDATE: NEW Comment [14-302(A)12, 30.7.4(b)(h)11 Slopes less than 25% based on new topographic
information. Any use or structure allowed by right or by special use permit in the underlying district, provided that
the owner submits new topographic information that is based on more accurate or better technical data
demonstrating, to the satisfaction of the county engineer, that the slopes are less than twenty-five (25) percent
Disturbance of preserved slopes is prohibited. County Engineer sign -off on this topographic information is
required prior to final site plan approval.
41. [UPDATE: NEW Comment 14.711 Provide a calculation on the site plan that specifies what percentage of the
provided open space includes flood plain, preserved slopes, and land devoted to stormwater management
facilities. When open space is required not more than 80% of the minimum open space can consist of those, and
other, uses. Stormwater facilities are one of those uses unless it can be shown that it is incorporate into a
permanent pond, lake or other water feature deemed by the agent to constitute a desirable open space amenity.
42. [UPDATE: NEW Comment] Provide street sections for all streets and alleys proposed with this site plan.
Ensure those street and alley section meet all requirements. Work with VDOT, Fire Rescue, engineering and
planning to provide street sections that meet all requirements.
Please contact Paty Saternye in the Planning Division by using psaternye(a)-albemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext.
3250 for further information.
Review Comments for SDP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: dames�� Engineering Requested Changes
1- Sheet 2 —
a- Submit plat vacating easement-
b- Show landscape features, 18-32-7-9(c)-
c- The area of TMP 61-160 & 62-213 has changed..added since last re,,ie .
d- Show legend-
- Sheet 3 —
a- For the proposed SWM facility add '(See V MP plan)'-
b- Remove ' tormwater Management' label in side bar.
c- Shade out/fade lots not included in Phase I A-
d- Show north arrow, legend-
e- An easement will need to be shown for the construction (grading & access) outside of project limits/property line-
3- Show area(s) of open space-
4- The road plan and wpo plan have to be approved before the F P is approved-
5- Show easements for drainage outside of right-of-way, SWIVI facility & access road -
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411912018
Review Comments for SDP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Tuesday, April 17, 2019 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: L County Attorneys Office I , Requested Changes
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411912018
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Tuesday, April 17, 2019 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Ievin McDermott
LJ ODD Planning See Recommendations
Recommend adding on -street parking on both sides of Fowler Street to the maximum extent possible within this development_
This area of Belvedere appears to be critically underparked and spaces on Belvedere Blvd that this application is using to meet
the parking requirements are also intended to meet parking requirements for other developments proposed (and existing)
including the SOCA Fields_ Lots 245-254 and 234-235 would need garages to accomodate the 2 parking spaces required for
each because the driveways are not wide or long enough to accomodate 2 vehicles- Please address whether there are garages
in these lots or increase the size of the driveways to accomodate 2 parked vehicles each_ The IP appears to show on -street
parking located within the area required for intersection sight distance_ Please verify that on -street parking is allowed in this
area and would not reduce intersection sight distance_
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Thursday, March 29, 2019 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review sus:
Reviewer: Shawn Maddox _ F]Fire Rescue I Requested Changes
250' is the maximum distance fron any point on street or road frontage to a hydrant.-
2- Streets should be no parking that do not meet 20' of unobstructed travel width based on parking configuration
3_ Fire flow test will be required before final approval_
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Monday, April 16, 2019 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
11 CBB E911 I Requested Changes El
Revi ewe r: I El i s e Kiewra
in is the existing Belvedere Br_ Either the site plans need to be udpated
7omeo, ner of 1581 Belvedere Br to see if they are willing to change their
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewe r:IRic hard Nelson
U ACSA I Requested Changes
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: I Victoria Fort
11 RA H See Recommendations
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Catpepar Virglnla 22701
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
April 18, 2018
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Paty Saternye
Re: Belvedere Phase IVA — Initial Site Plan
SDP-2018-00009
Review #2
Dear Ms. Saternye:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated 5
March 2018, and finds it to be generally acceptable.
Note that we have previously reviewed and approved the Phase IV road plan. This plan does not
appear to deviate from the road plan, other than the proposed additional lots along Fowler Street.
If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434422-9894.
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.
Sincerely,
04, tqJ. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Tuesday, March 20, 2019 Department1DivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Michael Dellinger CDD Inspections No Obje-Ction
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018
Review Comments for SOP201800009 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Belvedere Phase I A - Initial
Date Completed: Thursday, April 12, 2019 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Unassigned Health Department No Obje-Ction
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10411812018