Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600045 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2016-09-28 Christopher Perez From: Nena Harrell <ulcwww@embarqmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 12:03 PM To: Amelia McCulley; 'Scott Collins'; Christopher Perez Subject: RE: Briarwood Access easement across Mr. Beard's property Amelia/Chris, Thanks for your input- now hopefully we can get VDoT to go along. Nena Original Message From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AMCCULLE@albemarle.org] Sent:Tuesday,September 27, 2016 11:32 AM To:Scott Collins<scott@collins-engineering.com>; Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Cc: Nena Harrell <ulcwww@embarqmail.com> Subject: RE: Briarwood Access easement across Mr. Beard's property Scott and Nena, Chris and I just sat down and went over the proposal. He knows the history and helped fill me in on what,when and why. Anyway, Chris and I agree that option#2 is possible (subject to VDOT approval of the offset)without a rezoning amendment. Option#1 is too significant of a shift and change to meet the proffer language requiring "alignment with the proposed road." So if you can get something in writing from VDOT approving option#2 so we know it won't jeopardize the public road acceptance,you're good to go with option#2. I hope this helps. From: Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 11:47 AM To:Amelia McCulley<AMCCULLE@albemarle.org>; Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Cc: Nena Harrell<ulcwww@embarqmail.com> Subject: RE: Briarwood Access easement across Mr. Beard's property Amelia- Thanks. I would hope that this can be handled in an exploratory meeting,and that we are not looking at rezonings or rezoning amendments. Let's go with next Monday for an exploratory meeting. Thx. Scot From: Amelia McCulley [mailto:AM000LLE@albemarle.org] Sent: Monday,September 26, 2016 11:18 AM To: Scott Collins; Christopher Perez Cc: Nena Harrell Subject: RE: Briarwood Access easement across Mr. Beard's property Hi there Scott and all, 1 This is probably best set as a preapp icl ation conference. It's my understanding that this change requires at least one and perhaps two different project zoning amendments. Let us know when is a good date for a preapp. If you're proposing a mandatory preapp, please go through Francis. If an exploratory, either Chris or I can handle it. From: Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:51 AM To: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org<mailto:cperez@albemarle.org»; Amelia McCulley<AMCCULLE@albemarle.org<mailto:AM000LLE@albemarle.org» Cc: Nena Harrell<ulcwww@embargmail.com<mailto:ulcwww@embargmail.com» Subject: Briarwood Access easement across Mr. Beard's property Chris,Amelia- We met again with Mr. Beard yesterday in regards to obtaining the access easement across his property. Mr. Beard's main issue is that with aligning the access into the Briarwood recreational area with Sunset Drive, it creates an issue with his rezoning. His rezoning plan shows(2) sets of duplex houses with the access easement in the middle (Option 2 in the attached exhibit reflects this situation). We do not have an issue with moving the access road to this location, but the 27'offset might be an issue with VDOT. Another option might be to move the access road to the east at the end of Mr. Beard's property(as shown as Option 1). This way, he can still build the (2)sets of duplex homes and grant the 50' access easement. In addition, the spacing would be far enough to meet VDOT requirements. Would you both be available for a meeting to discuss these (2) options and see if we can work out something that allows the access across Mr. Beard's property while still allowing him to construct the (2) duplex units. Thank you. Scott Collins 2 111110 o D �*J ^ r,'''',' o mn W '"— w. —w—w w w u / a21 k III a a is A 2-- --- 1- 11 I�.1l ,J' �'p " ;^� • S N DRIVE m�3 w N �i� .�., — , I'S ,t I i „.� h..•.aor�N a•.N.\- oar.���a�.•."wa�\...NN, ••.����.� wX\��.i o'Pp LIC R - o WGI �� _:---- _ G \\\\\\\�.\\\\\. ..,.. - i / /..,. - --i - ,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\�\\"\:•,,,\�.y�.l '\. mu . .,., .,..,.. NX. N.-N.N N N.-; ' 11 A� e' 4 ,' �� I �LZI I \CI, �j '1 ON �. y%A p �n mo ° *=I �' ...t'' m z... I IrY © ,jtkq di P 11 02 1 `, 1 ` t?� ,‘‘‘,„R pi it O m t 1 '..: A. © f I 1 _N 1 Ali ZZ OM 0 E c b, _ o c^ y: o I I m ;D La1 t., t; 31 r ;ti ,z+` 1 s;?:t::ra. I Z x =ti. e w o �'I 11 I - . 'J'... nm1DnOD vm ann I T t..; v^�.;.i.':y; OOZ O�Oa2D '^00 .,,�.��'.I+l, ...:.r:5.^.;: 0 d1PI1liF \ Z � ntrt ® pi ifa, o p °,C m 2I00 m .Lii1gm5yzc, I .,, <rF a' .>'�x z � % OO O z^r2��99�ip9�lcZi�o� \AO m ,,,,,. .,,,,-,),,2:-.,.. 7% :':',,-.yO l } O — _pilr_lon Opp Znm i; '. �.. �mO2�mCgr.D,n ivziD m r 3 zm p53zMI .t,,,:,,-,,,,,!!:4.,:,_4:13 •Al•:^��'�,It S ✓}) -.D P� Ad .r �F D p�m ,25531-'2g 'a9Ar0 Paq ill '";11- 0 '64 '0' h Q n2OO�p 1°.q2 3 m t'I.i`.).ti,i..:.J•�'• ei pmnncu Op00na rn Zc'" m0A7m? rl , :ii ! '1 - \ Orval Z p 13 r� � Z I O i' 1 3 II NNW Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 1:07 PM To: Amelia McCulley Subject: Briarwood - primary rec area Attachments: ZMA95-20 Ray Beard Rezoning - approval letter and attached plat.pdf;ZMA 79-32 approval planA.PDF;ZMA200500009 Action Letter.pdf; Collins proposal - Briarwood Recreation access exhibit.pdf Amelia, Attached are the approval docs for the item we'll be discussing tomorrow. The applicable documents are: ZMA2005-9 Briarwood's latest rezoning (Proffer#1 dictates access by referencing ZMA79-32) ZMA79-32 Original Briarwood rezoning which the entrance location is predicated on, with a note that says: "Provide vehicular access to recreation area on alignment w/proposed road... " ZMA95-20 Ray Beard rezoning (Proffer#1 access to rec area guided by ZMA79-32 "Plan A". Attached as ZMA79-32. Proffer#19 says; "Lots along St Ives Rd may be developed in accord w/the attached plat by S.L. key dated Sept 27, 1995. " I offer my opinion below: -The recreational area's access road needs to line up with the new road across from St Ives bc ZMA2005-9 and ZMA95-20 reference and requires it to per ZMA79-32. In this circumstance I'd personally be willing to exercise a little common sense being it is a rezoning from 1979 that had no engineering work done on it. Thus I'd allow it to be slightly shifted as depicted in Scott's diagram as Option#2 but only if Mr. Beard is ok with it and if VDOT is willing to approve the entrances for both entrances with this alignment(the applicant would need to provide VDOT's approval for both entrances b4 final site plan approval is granted w/this shift). I would not allow option#1 to be approved bc it impedes on the neighboring properties existing situations that they bought into. Granted one of the neighbors is Ray Beard but the others across the street are not. Thus we'd be approving a new access road for the park closer to existing homes that bought there,knowing or not knowing that a road would be put in a little bit away but now it'd be closer to them. Does not seem fair nor equitable. Especially when those neighbors are not permitted to use the park bc it's only for briarwood residents. Thus if they can meet Option#2 w/VDOT approval, let's move on and approve it. If they cannot, then they need to look into a rezoning to modify the access. Christopher P.Perez j Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road j Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From:Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday,July 13, 2016 12:13 PM 1 '*o/ To: Amelia McCulley<AMCCULLE@albemarle.org> Subject: Briarwood - primary rec area Amelia, I am glad to meet with you about this. While it is fresh on my mind, see my responses in red to the questions which came up in your meeting. "Frank Pohl and I met with Scott,Nena and Wendell yesterday. Scott has revised the plan to balance cut and fill onsite and now allow it to be a by-right fine grading use within the floodplain. They will bond this plan to move forward with the plat."At this point all we have for the primary rec area is an initial site plan approved w/ conditions. I believe the applicant still needs to submit the final site plan& the WPO plan for review/approval prior to bonding. Once those plans are approved, based on the wording in proffer#4, I assume the County would require bonding of all work and improvements depicted on the approved final site plan and the WPO/grading plan in order to construct the rec area. Am I correct?Notably the road plan which is being reviewed to extend St. Ives along this property's frontage would also need to be approved and bonded, otherwise there is no access to the rec area be the road is not built/bonded yet. Two questions arose: 1. What do the Briarwood application plan and proffers require in terms of types of improvements in this area? Is a pavilion required?The requirement is for"picnic facilities". Do we have any specifics for what a picnic facility consists of? I assume we would accept a couple picnic tables. The structure in the floodplain question came up—it's allowed, but wanted to know if it's required. The requirements are stated in proffer 4 and were included in the condition approval letter of SUB2016-4 Briarwood Phase 4 (Lots 1-50, 24A, 25A) & Phase 6 (lots 1 —4) - Preliminary Subdivision, as follows: "JZMA2004-14 Application plan,Proffer 4, and Proffer 11 The primary recreation area south of Camelot shall be built or bonded prior to final plat approval of Phase 4. The recreational area shall consist of a baseball/multipurpose field, two half basketball courts,playground equipment, and picnic facilities. Prior to final plat approval an approved site plan and WPO plan shall be required for the primary recreational area and the off street parking, access aisles, and commercial entrance serving this area. " 2) What process would be required if they changed the access point for this road to the other point (pipestem road frontage)? See the attached email in which I had answered this question for them. If you think that guidance is not correct, let me know and I'll revert course to your guidance. Christopher P.Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 2 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 7:53 AM To: 'Scott Collins' Subject: RE: Briarwood recreation and subdivision plat Scott, See my responses below in red. Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development'County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road J Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From:Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com] Sent:Thursday,July 28, 2016 7:48 AM To: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Subject: Briarwood recreation and subdivision plat Chris- Can you do me a favor and not distribute the site plan for Briarwood Recreation. We are going to replace the site plan with a new site plan. Amelia just got some additional information back to Wendell and Nena which changes some of the programing down there. We will resubmit the site plan by Monday morning and hopefully you can distribute it to everyone next week. Roger that...l'll wait for you to submit the corrected version. (also, remember 10 copies please). Also, do you have time tomorrow or Monday to meet with Wendell, Nena, and myself about the current subdivision plat for the 9 lots at Briarwood that you are currently reviewing. We might need to make one change on that plat and want to run it by you first. I don't have time this week, but next week I'm all yours. How does Tuesday,August 2nd sound ? Anytime from 9am—noon. Thx. Scott 1 %of NS Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 10:50 AM To: 'Scott Collins' Cc: Megan Yaniglos Subject: SDP2016-45 Briarwood Recreational Area—final site plan Attachments: Action Packet-SDP2016-25 Briarwood Recreational Area - initial site pl....pdf Scott, SDP2016-45 Briarwood Recreational Area—final site plan I'm distributing the above site plan to the various reviewers; however, note that you only provided 8 copies of the plan. I'm short 2 of the required copies of the plans, as the conditionally approval letter requested 10 copies to allow all reviewers to have a copy. Did you distribute any of the final site plan sets to individual reviewers which would negate the need for me to distribute them to those folks (such as ACSA, RWSA, or VDOT...etc)? Let me know, otherwise I need 2 additional copies to complete my distribution. thanks Christopher P. Perez 1 Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road 1 Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 From:Christopher Perez Sent:Wednesday,July 27, 2016 10:22 AM To: 'Scott Collins'<scott@collins-engineering.com> 4 Cc: Megan Yaniglos<myaniglos@albemarle.org>;Judy Martin- BC/ZS<jmartin4@albemarle.org> Subject:SDP2016-45 Briarwood Recreational Area—final site plan +1,` Scott, I received SDP2016-45 Briarwood Recreational Area—final site plan and am distributing it for review to various reviewer. In the file I noticed yall had included 3 copies of a new plat by Lincoln Surveying which is to plat the new 50' public access easement. In order to conduct the review of the easement plat this needs to be entered into Countyview as a new submittal to include an application, the review fee, and assigned a number by the front desk. Please do this with intake at the front desk, at which point that easement plat will be distributed for review. Thanks Christopher P. Perez 1 Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road 1 Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 1 Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 8:11 AM To: Scott Collins Cc: Rebecca Ragsdale;John Anderson; Ron Higgins;Johnathan Newberry Subject: Briarwood Recreational Area - followup Attachments: ZMA95-20 Ray Beard Rezoning - approval letter and attached plat.pdf Scott, See my comments below in red. Hope this helps. Christopher P.Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development(County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext.3443 From:Johnathan Newberry Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 5:55 PM To: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Cc:Scott Collins<scott@collins-engineering.com>; Rebecca Ragsdale<rragsdale@albemarle.org>;John Anderson <janderson2@albemarle.org>; Ron Higgins<rhiggins@albemarle.org> Subject: 2pm Exploratory Pre-app Notes with Scott Collins on Briarwood Recreational Area Hey Chris, Hope you're feeling better. Scott, Wendell and Nena attended our meeting this afternoon and I think it was productive. I can catch you up on the discussion with John, Rebecca and Ron, but the following are Planning-related questions that I'm happy to help research. Ultimately, I think it makes sense for you to provide this information to Scott given the length of your history and background with Briarwood, but we can research it together. Here are questions/requests: 1. Scott requested more specific documentation on the exact location/alignment of access road to serve the field area. Below I've pasted a section of a map from one of your attachments, but are there metes/bounds anywhere for this access? Does the exhibit from the Beard rezoning possibly show it? Attached is the action letter for ZMA95-20 Ray Beard rezoning and the exhibit (unrecorded plat) referenced in proffer 19. This document provides more precise information. a. As a follow-up, is there enough room within the easement(I do not believe this 50' reserved access area is within a platted easement, the attached plat by SL Key was never recorded rather it's merely an exhibit that is referenced in the action letter as proffer 19)to do sufficient grading for construction of the access? Scott mentioned that even a 50' easement may not provide enough room in this area due to the topography. Being there is no easement constraining the grading, the applicant will need to work with the property owner Ray Beard to accomplish this iI proposal which would likely involve grading throughout his entire lot to accomplish the access and will allow him to develop his lot accordingly. 1 '` - . 4rov. t.)eixtufor aoe 5 lv _ ' , Wire t o f.hire4( , "> cm.5 4 'par ' 1 ?taliagt. PfatMAR pkl.RE'IION AREA 2. We need to confirm the County's expectations for the size of baseball/multipurpose field. A chart in the Comp Plan shows an area of 180 yds. x 140 yds., but this is quite a large area. Are we sure this guidance doesn't actually mean 180' x 140'? (Appendix) That same chart provides a specific calculation for a baseball field too, 250' X 25'4' =62,500 SF Instead of using"Neighborhood Park Facility Sta.: ..• `, which i meant to serve a . :- :: .• ation of people, utilize the `Pocket Park Facility Stand- d' this pr. ides m lti-purpose fields at 120 yards X 60 yards, when converted to feet calculates out o 64,800 SF. e5 Hope that helps. 3. Finally, we need to confirm the required parking standard for this recreational area. Using the standards below, the parking area would also be quite large. Ron and Rebecca noted there's additional ordinance language to consider beyond what's pasted below. Baseball field- 20 spaces per field Basketball courts - 2 spaces per basket Playground equipment- 1 space per one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet of useable recreation area Yes, it appears Ron and Rebecca are correct. The ordinance provides the following methodology to reduce the number of parking spaces for this type of facility, see the section below taken from Section 4.12.6: Recreation, commercial and residential: Recreation Parking spaces required Baseball field 20 per field Basketball court 2 per basket Golf course 4 per hole,plus 1 per employee Horseshoe pits 2 per pit Soccer field 24 per field Skating rink 1 per 200 square feet of rink area Swimming pool 1 per 125 square feet of water surface 2 Tennis court 2 per court For each recreation use not specified above, one (1) space per one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet of useable recreation area. The minimum number of parking spaces required for a residential recreational facility within a subdivision shall be reduced by the percentage of dwelling units within the subdivision within one- quarter mile of the facility." Scott, please reply to Chris if the recap above doesn't include all of the information you requested. Thanks, J.T. Newberry Planner County of Albemarle, Planning Division 434-296-5832, ext. 3270 3 Christopher Perez From: Johnathan Newberry Sent: Friday,June 03, 2016 2:26 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: 2pm Exploratory Pre-app Notes with Scott Collins on Briarwood Recreational Area Ear you go. From:Johnathan Newberry Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 5:55 PM To:Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Cc:Scott Collins<scott@collins-engineering.com>; Rebecca Ragsdale <rragsdale@albemarle.org>;John Anderson <janderson2@albemarle.org>; Ron Higgins<rhiggins@albemarle.org> Subject: 2pm Exploratory Pre-app Notes with Scott Collins on Briarwood Recreational Area Hey Chris, Hope you're feeling better. Scott, Wendell and Nena attended our meeting this afternoon and I think it was productive. I can catch you up on the discussion with John, Rebecca and Ron, but the following are Planning-related questions that I'm happy to help research. Ultimately, I think it makes sense for you to provide this information to Scott given the length of your history and background with Briarwood, but we can research it together. Here are questions/requests: 1. Scott requested more specific documentation on the exact location/alignment of access road to serve the field area. Below I've pasted a section of a map from one of your attachments, but are there metes/bounds anywhere for this access? Does the exhibit from the Beard rezoning possibly show it? a. As a follow-up, is there enough room within the easement to do sufficient grading for construction of the access?Scott mentioned that even a 50'easement may not provide enough room in this area due to the topography. 1 --- A kr a €45 f v "' ._ r 700-aff:sinels�u^Gw •tirc5 it tbv imSic_ aq•Sr G �� PRIMARY RECREAf ON AREA 1 i 2. We need to confirm the County's expectations for the size of baseball/multipurpose field. A chart in the Comp Plan shows an area of 180 yds. x 140 yds., but this is quite a large area. Are we sure this guidance doesn't actually mean 180' x 140'? (Appendix) 3. Finally, we need to confirm the required parking standard for this recreational area. Using the standards below, the parking area would also be quite large. Ron and Rebecca noted there's additional ordinance language to consider beyond what's pasted below. Baseball field - 20 spaces per field Basketball courts - 2 spaces per basket Playground equipment - 1 space per one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet of useable recreation area Scott, please reply to Chris if the recap above doesn't include all of the information you requested. Thanks, J.T. Newberry Planner County of Albemarle, Planning Division 434-296-5832, ext. 3270 2