HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800050 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2018-07-25County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Ryan Yauger, P.E. (RYAUGER@BOHLERENG.COM)
From: Cameron Langille — Senior Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: July 25, 2018
Subject: SDP201800050 — Brookhill Block 4 Final Site Plan
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department Community Development will
recommend approval of the plan referred to above when the following items 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 to the Albemarle County
Code.]
New Comments First Review of Block 4 Final Site Plan:
[General Comment] On Sheet C-106, please add the approved initial site plan application number within the Block 4B
parcel/area.
2. [ZMA201500007] There are currently two variations to the Brookhill Code of Development under review. This
includes a variation to the minimum 10' rear setback requirement for Block 4, and the width of the Route 29 buffer
around the VDOT stormwater pond. These special exceptions/variations to the COD are schedule to go before the Board
of Supervisors at the September 5' BOS meeting. Staff cannot approve the final site plan unless the BOS approves the
requested variations, and if the variations are approved, the final site plan cannot be approved until after September 5tn
Comments from SDP20170047 - Brookhill Block 4A Initial Site Plan Action Letter:
1. 132.4.2.1 (f)] The notification fee of $215 has not been paid. The fee must be paid prior to Friday, October 20t' in order for
the initial site plan to be approved. Rev.1 : Comment addressed.
2. [32.5.2 (a)] The "Height of All Structures" section of the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102 is incorrect. Table
2.3.2.2 from page 17 of the Brookhill Code of Development that states that there is a maximum building height of 4 stories/60'
by right or 5 stories/70' with a special exception for Block 4. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
a. Please state the proposed height and number of stories for each building proposed in Block 4A. As stated on page 17
of the Code of Development, buildings exceeding three (3) stories shall require a 26' wide, exclusive of shoulders,
aerial fire apparatus access road that is no more than 30' from the building to meet Fire and Rescue Regulations. If
any of the buildings exceed three stories, the aerial fire access road may be required and the site layout may be
required to change. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. [ZMA201500007] On all applicable drawings, please show the boundary lines of the Route 29 buffer, as described in Section
2.4.2 of the Code of Development. The overall 100' buffer line should be shown, in addition to the 70' undisturbed buffer
line and the 30' planted/reforested buffer. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
a. All buffers must be measured from the proposed property lines or edges of the public right of way. The initial site
plan must verify that no proposed improvements in Block 4A extend beyond the minimum 100' buffer. Please make
all buffer lines visible across the drawings. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
4. [General Comment] The site plan titles mentions that this is for Blocks 4A and 8A. However, it appears that all
improvements associated with the future Block 8A are shown for reference only and will be reviewed under a separate site
plan application. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
a. [32.5.2 (a)] Please remove Block 8A from the title on the Cover Sheet, and the sheet title panels on all other drawings.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
b. [32.5.2 (a)] Please remove all labels, parking, building footprints, and other improvements associated with the future
development in Block 8A that will not be constructed as part of this site plan. These features are currently visible on
Sheets C-300, C-301, C-302, C-400, C-401, C-402, C-500, C-501, C-502, C-700, C-701, and C-702. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
c. [32.5.2 (a)] Please remove all information associated with future parking and buildings in Block 8A from the Zoning
and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2 (a)] Please show and label all proposed parcel boundaries with dimensions associated with the development of Block
4A. Include a note stating the intended timing for subdividing the Block 4A parcel. Comment not fully addressed. Two lot
subdivision and boundary line adiustment plat still under review. The final site elan for Block 4 will need to show the
revised property boundaries, the recorded instrument, and the accurate TMP numbers of the new parcels/revised
arcel lines, prior to final site plan approval.
6. 132.5.2 (a)] Is the access drive that comes off of Road B that will serve Block 4A and Block 8A a proposed public street,
private street, or travel way? Please label this improvement across all applicable drawings. Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2 (i)] The road plans for Roads A and B have not yet been approved by the County, but this is required prior to approval
of the final site plan. Please be aware that the final site plan will need to accurately depict all improvements within the right-
of-way of Roads A and B. Please refer to the attached VDOT comment letter for additional information.
a. Please shade out all road improvements that are subject to review and approval with the road plan application. Add
labels to all applicable drawings stating that Roads A and B are proposed/under review and are shown for clarity
purposes only on the initial site plan for Block 4A. The roads are currently under review as part of road plan
SUB201700117. Comment addressed.
b. State "proposed public right-of-way" in the labels for Roads A and B. Comment addressed.
c. All construction details, road profiles, etc. related to the design/construction of Road A and B improvements within
the proposed public right-of-way will be approved through SUB201700117. These details do not need to be included
with the initial site plan. Comment addressed.
d. Please remove the Street Construction Notes on Sheet C-102. The streets comprising the internal road network of
Brookhill that will provide frontage for the Block 4A parcel are currently under review as a road plan application,
SUB201700117 and all design and construction associated with the roads will take place prior to final site plan
approval. Comment not fully addressed. SUB201700117 still under review. This comment will be addressed
once the road plans are approved.
132.5.2 (a)] The proffers shown on Sheets C-103 and C-104 are not the approved proffers associated with the Brookhill
rezoning. Please replace the proffer statement and exhibits on the site plan with the signed and approved proffers, dated
October 21, 2016. Comment addressed.
a. On Sheet C-100, please add the ZMA application number under the "Code of Development' section. The approved
application number is ZMA201500007. Comment addressed.
b. On Sheet C-100, the revision date shown for the Code of Development is incorrect. The approved Code of
Development had a final revision date of October 13, 2016. Please amend the label. Comment addressed.
c. Please add a line with the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approval date for the Code of Development,
November 9, 2016. Comment addressed.
d. On Sheet C-105, please amend the date within the label for the Brookhill Phasing Plan. It currently states June 2016.
The phasing plan was approved as page 7 of the Code of Development, which had a final revision date of October
13, 2016 and an approval date of November 9, 2016. Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2 (a)] Please provide a proffer narrative that states which proffers (if any) will be addressed through this site plan.
a. Please clarify whether any affordable units will be provided as part of this site plan. The applicable proffer is #413,
related to affordable housing required for for -rent affordable housing units. Not applicable. Applicant working with
Rebecca Ragsdale in Zoning to develop a proffer tracking chart.
2
10. [32.5.2 (a)] On Sheet C-100, please state the Special Use Permit application number that was approved to allow grading
activities in the Flood Hazard Overlay District. The approved application number is SP201500025 and the County approval
date was November 9, 2016. Comment addressed.
a. Add the signed resolution and approved conditions of SP201500025 to Sheets C-103 and C-104. Comment
addressed.
11. 132.5.2 (a)] Please state the owner names and address for each existing parcel within Brookhill on Sheet C-100. Not all
parcels are currently owned by Riverbend Development. Comment addressed.
12. 132.5.2 (a)] Please amend the "Zoning and Overlay Districts" in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. It
should state Neighborhood Model Development District as the primary zoning district. The Block 4A site lies within the
following overlay districts: EC - Entrance Corridor Overlay, AIA — Airport Impact Overlay, the Managed Steep Slopes
Overlay District, and the FH — Flood Hazard Overlay. Comment addressed.
13. 132.5.2 (a)] Please amend the "Associated Plans" section in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. It should
be titled "Proffers and Code of Development" and should state the November 9, 2016 approval date by the County next to the
Brookhill Code of Development. Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2 (a)] Please add a line to the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102 titled "Block Classification" with
"Urban Density Residential" as the block type for Block 4A, as stipulated by the Brookhill Code of Development. Comment
not fully addressed. Please amend the Block Classification line on Sheet C-102 so that it states "Block 4" instead of
Block 4A.
15. [32.5.2 (a)] Please amend the Building Yard Setbacks section in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. Please
insert Table 2.3.2.2 from page 17 of the Brookhill Code of Development that states the correct minimum and maximum
setbacks for Block 4. Comment not fully addressed. A variation to the rear setbacks in Block 4 is currently under
review. The setback table on Sheet C-102 may need to be revised if the variation is approved and the required setbacks
change.
16. 132.5.2 (a)] Please remove the "Off Street Parking/Loading Space Yard Setbacks" section from the Zoning and Site
Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. Please add the minimum setbacks and notes for parking as an accessory use from the
Relegated Parking Guidelines table from Section 2.9, page 27 of the Code of Development. Comment addressed.
17. [32.5.2 (b)] Please amend the "Proposed Use" section in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. The proposed
use should be "multi -family dwellings" and should state the number of bedrooms proposed (i.e. 100 1-bedroom units and 100
2-bedroom units). Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.2 (b)] Please state the square footage and acreage occupied by each use in Block 4A on Sheet C-102. This includes
residential uses (including square feet of individual buildings), ancillary uses (including recreational areas), non-residential
uses, parking and vehicle circulation areas, percentage of open space, etc.
a. Please be aware that recreation areas are classified as ancillary uses to residential uses, per Section 2.2.2 (page 10) of
the Code of Development. Per Table 5 Density Regulations (Page 15), ancillary uses do not count against the
maximum non-residential square footage permitted in each block. Comment not fully addressed. No non-
residential square footage/use is being provided in Block 4 according to this final site plan. Recreational uses
are classified as ancillary uses and do not count against the maximum permitted non-residential square
footage. The "Remaining Available Non -Residential" figure should be revised to state 15,000 sg.ft. per Table
5 on page 15 of the COD.
b. Please state what types of recreation facilities are being provided within the amenity area (i.e. pool, tot lot, basketball
court, etc.) Comment not fully addressed. Please clarify the "Amenity Area" portion of the "Site Use Area
Tabulations" on Sheet C-102. No non-residential square footage/use is being provided in Block 4 according to
this final site plan. Recreational uses are classified as ancillary uses and do not count against the maximum
permitted non-residential square footage. Is the "Other" figure supposed to represent the area of open space
that will be provided in Block 4 to meet the minimum recreation requirements?
19. [32.5.2 (b)] Please add Table 5 Density Regulations (page 15) of the Code of Development on Sheet C-102.
a. Please add another table that states the proposed gross residential density, number of proposed residential units, and
square footage of proposed non-residential buildings being provided in Block 4A. The second table should have
another column that states the number of permitted residential units and square footage of non-residential uses
remaining in the rest of Block 4. Comment addressed.
20. [32.5.2 (b)] No loading spaces are shown, will any be provided? Any loading spaces must meet the design standards specified
in Section 18-4.12.13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.1 (c)] Please show the boundaries and dimensions of all Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes and wetlands areas on
the existing conditions and grading drawings. Comment not fully addressed. Preserved steep slopes are not shown across
all drawings. Please revise the plans.
22. 132.5.2 (f)] Please state whether the property lies within a water supply watershed on Sheet C-102. Comment addressed.
23. 132.7.7 & ZMA201500007] Please refer to the attached PDF titled Brookhill Zoning Map Amendment ZMA2015-007 —
Request for Substitution of Required Recreational Amenities, dated 9/21/2015 and prepared by Collins Engineering.
a. This request was approved to allow the proposed substitutions to the minimum civic space and recreation
requirements listed in Section 2.4.3 of the Code of Development. The Proposed Amenities listed under each civic
area in the attached request will satisfy the minimum recreational requirements for the first 650 multifamily dwelling
units and single family attached units. Once the buildout within Brookhill exceeds 650 total multifamily and single
family attached units, 200 square feet of recreation space will be required per unit exceeding 650. As such, the
apartments in Block 4A do not need to contain recreation areas. Comment addressed.
b. Staff requests that a table be provided on each site plan and subdivision plat that lists the number of multi -family and
single family attached dwellings approved in each Block. This will allow staff to track whether additional recreation
areas are required if the amount of multi -family residential and attached single family dwellings exceeds 650 units in
the overall development. Comment addressed.
24. [32.5.2 (a)] Please amend the Block Area Summary table on Sheet C-105 so that it includes the proposed acreage of Block
4C. Comment not addressed. Please amend Block Area Summary on Sheet C-106 to include Block 4C.
25. [32.5.2 (e)] Please provide more details about the existing landscape features as described in Section 18-32.7.9.4(c). Specify
the areas of existing vegetation that will be removed through grading associated with the WPO plan. This includes any areas
within the 70' undisturbed buffer portion.
a. [ZMA201500007] In accordance with Code of Development Section 3.2.3, please provide the locations, species,
and sizes of existing trees with diameter at breast heights greater than 18 inches within the buffer area along Route
29. Comment not fully addressed. The existing conditions, grading, and landscaping drawings do not identify
any qualifying vegetation. Please verify whether these features exist, and if so, show the locations, species, and
sizes of existing trees with diameter at breast heights greater than 18 inches within the Route 29 buffer and the
greenway area at the north of Block 4A.
b. Staff has been informed that the existing treeline does not occupy the entire 70' portion. As discussed via email with
Ryan Yauger on July 28, 2017, the applicants were to provide an arborist report or drawings that show the species,
density, and locations of existing vegetation in the 70' portion. The applicants stated that they may need to perform
some grading in the 70' portion, and staff stated that disturbances to the 70' buffer may be permitted if additional
landscaping needs to be installed. However, this will require approval from the Director of Community Development,
as specified in Section 2.4.2 (page 19) of the Code of Development. Comment addressed.
26. [32.5.2 (a)] The building setback lines shown and labeled on the plans are incorrect, per Table 2.3.2.2 of the Code of
Development. Please amend the minimum and maximum setback line locations across all applicable drawings. Label each
setback line as a front, side, corner side, or rear setback and state the dimensions in the label. Setback lines should be measured
from the proposed right-of-way. Comment not fully addressed. The setback lines may need to be amended pending BOS
approval of the variation to the setback requirements of Block 4.
27. [ZMA201500007] The seventy-two (72) parking spaces proposed on the southern end of Block 4A are not relegated and
screened from the proposed Road B in accordance with Section 2.9 (page 26) of the Code of Development. Also, the plan
does not specify whether the travel way just south of those parking spaces is a proposed public street (refer to comment #2
4
above). If it is, these spaces may need to be relocated behind the two multi -family buildings in order to meet the relegation
standards. Please provide additional information on the proposed screening measures and parcel boundaries. Comment not
applicable, parking spaces relocated since initial site plan approval.
28. [32.5.2 (n)] The site plan does not show any/label any sidewalks inside of the development. All sidewalk and pedestrian
access improvements must be shown, labeled, and dimensioned. This includes handicap ramps leading from all proposed
sidewalks within and adjacent to the parking area. Comment addressed.
29. 132.5.2 (n)] On the site plan drawings, please label and call out the locations of the primary and secondary building entrances
to each apartment building in accordance with the Urban Density Residential block regulations Section 2.2.2 (page 10) of the
Code of Development. Comment addressed.
30. 132.5.2 (n)] Are any dumpsters of trash compactors proposed on site? If so, please show the locations of these improvements
on the drawings with dimensions. The dumpster pad area will need to comply with the minimum design standards set forth
in Section 4.12.19 of the Zoning Ordinance. Comment addressed.
31. 132.5.2 (k)] Please show the location of all proposed sewer and drainage easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width
measurement. Comment addressed.
32. 132.5.2 (1)] Please show the location of all proposed utility easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width measurement.
Comment addressed.
33. 132.5.2 (n)] Please state the proposed surface materials for all parking lots, travel ways, walkways, etc. in a label on the site
plan drawings. Comment addressed.
34. [32.7.9] All landscaping such as streets trees proposed along Roads A and B, and within the buffer along Polo Grounds Road
will be reviewed and approved with the road plan application, SUB201700117. These items should not be included in the
Landscape Schedules on Sheets C-700 through C-704. Comment addressed.
a. Please include a label stating which landscaping items are proposed with the Block 4A site plans, and which are part
of the road plan application. Comment addressed.
35. [32.7.9] Please move the Landscaping notes in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102 to the Landscape
drawings. Refer to the following comments #36 and #37 below for changes to the current calculations shown. Comment
addressed.
36. 132.7.9.61 Please provide a calculation for the amount of landscaping required and proposed within the site in order to comply
with the minimum 5% for landscaping required within a parking area. Comment addressed.
a. [32.7.9.6 (a)] Please provide a calculation for the minimum number of trees required within the parking area based
on the number of proposed parking spaces. As a reminder, one (1) large or medium shade tree is required per ten (10)
parking spaces or portion thereof. Comment addressed.
37. [32.7.9.8 (a)] Please provide a calculation for the minimum tree canopy required and proposed in Block 4A based on the
proposed density of residential uses. It appears that the proposed density of Block 4A is 18.5 du/acre, which means that the
minimum tree canopy is 15%, not 10% as currently stated on Sheet C-102. Comment not addressed. Block 4A tree canopy
is 15%, not 10% as stated on Sheet C-703 based on the proposed density of DU/acre. Please revise the Landscape
Plans to comply with this requirement.
38. [General Comment] Please be aware that the TMP numbers and parcel acreages may change between the initial and final
site plans. The developers have stated that they will subdivide a large parcel for Block 4A in the near future. Staff may
request that the tax map numbers, parcel acreages, and ownership information be updated on the final site plan to reflect any
recorded plats that may be approved prior to final site plan approval. Comment not fully addressed. A two -lot subdivision
plat and boundary line adjustment is still under review; final site plan must be updated with boundaries and Deed
Book and Page references after approval and recordation of subdivision plat across all applicable drawings.
39. [32.5.2 (n)] Please state the height of all proposed fences in the labels used on the drawings. Profile view details of all
proposed fences and constructed screening measures will be required with the final site plan. Each will need to show the types
of materials used and dimensions. Comment addressed.
40. 132.5.2 (p)] Please add Figure 4 from Section 2.4.2 (page 19) of the Code of Development to the Landscape plans. Comment
no longer applicable. Supplemental planting cross section shown on plans for Route 29 buffer.
41. 132.7.9.5 (e)] Please provide additional shrubs that will screen the seventy-two parking spaces visible from Road A on the
south side of Block 4A. The shrubs should be planted between the proposed parking and the public street. Comment no
longer applicable, the original parking lot has been relocated and is now behind the buildings in Block 4A.
42. [32.7.9.7 (a)(2)] The seventy-two parking spaces on the south side of Block 4A need to be screened from the future Block
8A. Please show landscaping and/or fencing along the grass strip on the north side of the travel way that is proposed at the
south end of Block 4A. Comment no longer applicable, the original parking lot has been relocated and is now behind
the buildings in Block 4A.
a. Any proposed vegetation must comply with the minimum sizes set forth in Section 18-32.7.9.7 (c). Fencing used for
screening must comply with Section 18-32.7.9.7 (e). Comment no longer applicable, the original parking lot has
been relocated and is now behind the buildings in Block 4A.
b. Please be aware that if only vegetation will be used for screening, the strip of land separating the parking area from
the travel way between Block 4A and Block 8A does not appear to be large enough (twenty feet wide) to accommodate
the minimum depth and spacing requirements for a double staggered row of landscaping as set forth in Section
32.7.9.7 (d). Please provide additional information on how the parking will be screened in compliance with the Code.
Comment no longer applicable, the original parking lot has been relocated and is now behind the buildings in
Block 4A.
43. 132.7.9.91 Please add a note to the Landscape plans stating "All landscaping shall be installed by the first planting season
following the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within the development." Comment addressed.
44. 132.7.9.91 Please add a note to the Landscape plans stating "All landscaping and screening shall be maintained in a healthy
condition by the current owner or a property owners' association, and replaced when necessary. Replacement material shall
comply with the approved landscape plan." Comment addressed.
45. [32.7.9] Please revise the Landscape drawings, Sheets C-700 through C-704 so that each drawing has a Landscape
Schedule that specifies the species, quantity, and spacing of landscaping proposed only on that drawing.
a. Please revise all Landscape Schedules so that the Botanical Name and Common Name of each species is
included, the proposed caliper and height at time of installation. Comment not fully addressed. Section
32.7.9.6 and Section 32.7.9.8 require a minimum caliper for large shade trees to be between 1 M2 - 1 1/4" at
time of installation. Medium shade trees may be installed at calipers between 1" — 1 1/4." Please add a
column to the Landscape Schedules stating whether the proposed tree species are medium or large shade
trees. If any large shade trees are proposed, please revise the calipers within the Landscape Schedules on
Sheets C-701 and C-702 to show calipers meeting the minimum requirement. Please revise.
b. Please add a column to the Landscape Schedules stating the spacing requirements for street trees, in accordance
with Section 2.8.1 and 3.2.1 of the Code of Development, and Section 32.7.9.5 the Zoning Ordinance. As a
reminder, one large shade tree is required every 50' of road frontage per the Zoning Ordinance. Comment not
applicable, tree spacing requirements and installation will be accomplished through the road plans under
review in SUB201700117.
46. 132.6.2 (h)] Please provide a signature panel with a line for each member of the Site Review Committee. Comment
addressed.
47. [32.7.8 and 4.17] The final site plan will need to include a lighting plan showing all proposed outdoor lighting locations,
luminaire types, heights, footcandle measurements inside of the property and along all proposed property lines, and include
manufacturer specifications demonstrating compliance with full -cutoff standards in accordance with Section 4.17 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Comment not fully addressed.
The Lighting Plan shows footcandle spillover exceeding the maximum permitted 0.5 footcandles within the Archer
6
Avenue public right of way adjacent to Block 4B, and within the Stella Lane public right of way adjacent to Block 4A.
Please revise the plans so that the maximum footcandle measurement within any portion of public right of ways does
not exceed 0.5 footcandles.
The Luminaire Schedules on Sheets C-704 and C-705 do not provide the lumens of the three proposed luminaires.
This information must be shown to verify compliance with Section 4.17.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Please add a column to the Luminaire Schedules on Sheets C-704 and C-705 stating the lamp type (e.g. LED, metal
halide, fluorescent, etc.) to verify compliance with Section 4.17.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Please provide documentation that any luminaire exceeding 3,000 lumens will be equipped with a full cutoff
shield, in compliance with Section 4.17.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Comments from SDP20180018 Brookhill Block 4B Initial Site Plan Action Letter:
[General Comment] Please see VDOT comment #1 regarding the driveway entrance proposed along Stella Lane for Block
4B. The entrance does not meet the required minimum spacing distance of 225' for separation from the roundabout. VDOT
staff have stated that Access Management Exception requests typically do not get approved for new developments along new
roads. As such, the design of the site may need to shift in order to provide greater separation between the Block 4B driveway
and the roundabout. Comment may be addressed, pending VDOT approval.
a. Per VDOT correspondence with Planning staff, the initial site plan can be approved so long as the driveway is shifted
and shown on the final site plans in accordance with the 225' minimum spacing requirement. Planning staff would
like to discuss this further at the Site Review Committee meeting to verify that this condition can be met on the final
site plan. Comment may be addressed, pending VDOT approval.
2. 132.5.2 (a)] Please revise the owner name listed on the Cover Sheet because it is incorrect. Albemarle County GIS identifies
the owners of TMP 46-19B3 and TMP 46-19B4 as Crockett Corporation, address of 435 Park Street, Charlottesville, VA
22901. Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2 (a)] The "Height of All Structures" section of the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102 is incorrect. Table
2.3.2.2 from page 17 of the Brookhill Code of Development that states that there is a maximum building height of 4 stories/60'
by right or 5 stories/70' with a special exception for Block 4.
a. Table 2.3.2.2 of the Code of Development also states that buildings greater than 3 stories must step back a minimum
of 15' after the third story or provide a minimum 15 foot front setback or side setback adjacent to the street. The site
plan says all buildings are proposed to be 4 stories, and each building appears to meet the minimum setbacks that
eliminates the stepback requirement. This comment is for information purposes only; please be aware that if buildings
move closer to the property lines and no longer meet the setback requirement, the stepback may be required during
final site plan review. Comment addressed.
b. As stated on page 17 of the Code of Development, buildings exceeding three (3) stories shall require a 26' wide,
exclusive of shoulders, aerial fire apparatus access road that is no more than 30' from the building to meet Fire and
Rescue Regulations. Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.2 (a)] There is currently a two -lot division plat under review to create the Block 4B parcel, and this may be approved
and recorded prior to final site plan submittal. On the final site plan, please show and label all parcel boundaries with
dimensions for the Block 4B. Please be aware that the TMP numbers and parcel acreages may change between the initial and
final site plans. Staff may request that the tax map numbers, parcel acreages, and ownership information be updated on the
final site plan to reflect any recorded plats that may be approved prior to final site plan approval. Comment not fully
addressed. Two -lot subdivision plat and boundary line adjustment is still under review; final site plan must be updated
with boundaries and Deed Book and Page references after approval and recordation of subdivision plat across all
applicable drawings.
5. [32.5.2 (i)] The road plans for Stella Lane and Road A have not yet been approved by the County, but this is required prior
to approval of the final site plan. Please be aware that the final site plan will need to accurately depict all improvements within
the right-of-ways. Please refer to the attached VDOT comment letter for additional information.
a. Please shade out all road improvements that are subject to review and approval with the road plan application. Add
labels to all applicable drawings stating that Stella Lane and Road A are proposed/under review and are shown for
clarity purposes only on the initial site plan for Block 4B. The roads are currently under review as part of road plan
SUB201700117. Comment not fully addressed, SUB201700117 still under review.
b. State "proposed public right-of-way" in the labels for Stella Lane and Road A. Comment not fully addressed.
"Proposed public ROW" labels not shown for Stella or Archer.
c. All construction details, road profiles, etc. related to the design/construction of Stella Lane and Road A improvements
within the proposed public right-of-way will be approved through SUB201700117. These details do not need to be
included with the initial site plan. Comment addressed.
6. 132.5.2 (a)] On Sheet C-100, please add the ZMA application number under the "Code of Development" section. The
approved application number is ZMA201500007. Comment addressed.
a. On Sheet C-100, the revision date shown for the Code of Development is incorrect. The approved Code of
Development had a final revision date of October 13, 2016. Please amend the label. Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2 (a)] Proffer 4 requires 15% of the total residential units constructed within Brookhill to be affordable housing. Please
provide information on whether any affordable housing units will be within Blocks 4A/4B. If none, please provide staff with
an update on the status of how this proffer will be met. Comment not fully addressed. Please provide staff with an update
on whether affordable units will be provided in Block 4 as a note on Sheet C-102.
8. 132.5.2 (a)] On Sheet C-100, please state the Special Use Permit application number that was approved to allow grading
activities in the Flood Hazard Overlay District. The approved application number is SP201500025 and the County approval
date was November 9, 2016. Comment addressed.
9. 132.5.2 (a)] Please amend the "Zoning and Overlay Districts" in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. It
should state Neighborhood Model Development District as the primary zoning district. Block 4B also lies within the following
overlay districts: EC - Entrance Corridor Overlay, AIA — Airport Impact Overlay, the Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes
Overlay District, and the FH — Flood Hazard Overlay. Comment addressed.
10. 132.5.2 (a)] Please amend the "Associated Plans" section in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. It should
be titled "Proffers and Code of Development ZMA201500007" and should state the November 9, 2016 approval date by the
County next to the Brookhill Code of Development. It should also state "Special use Permit SP201500025" with the approval
date of November 9, 2016. Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2 (a)] Please add a line to the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102 titled "Block Classification" with
"Urban Density Residential" as the block type for Block 413, as stipulated by the Brookhill Code of Development. Comment
addressed.
12. [32.5.2 (a)] Please amend the Building Yard Setbacks section in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. Please
insert Table 2.3.2.2 from page 17 of the Brookhill Code of Development that states the correct minimum and maximum
setbacks for Block 4. Comment not fullv addressed. A variation to the rear setbacks in Block 4 is currently under
review. The setback table on Sheet C-102 may need to be revised if the variation is annroved and the required setbacks
change.
13. [32.5.2 (a)] Please remove the "Off Street Parking/Loading Space Yard Setbacks" section from the Zoning and Site
Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. Please add the minimum setbacks and notes for parking as an accessory use from the
Relegated Parking Guidelines table from Section 2.9, page 27 of the Code of Development. Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2 (b)] Please amend the "Proposed Use" section in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102. The proposed
use should be "multi -family dwellings" and should state the number of bedrooms proposed (i.e. 75 1-bedroom units and 96
2-bedroom units). Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2 (b)] Please state the square footage and acreage occupied by each use in Block 4B on Sheet C-102. This includes
residential uses (including square feet of individual buildings), ancillary uses (including recreational areas), non-residential
uses, parking and vehicle circulation areas, percentage of open space, etc.
a. Please be aware that recreation areas are classified as ancillary uses to residential uses, per Section 2.2.2 (page 10) of
the Code of Development. Per Table 5 Density Regulations (Page 15), ancillary uses do not count against the
maximum non-residential square footage permitted in each block. Comment not fully addressed. No non-
residential square footage/use is being provided in Block 4 according to this final site plan. Recreational uses
are classified as ancillary uses and do not count against the maximum permitted non-residential square
footage. The "Remaining Available Non -Residential' figure should be revised to state 15,000 sq.ft. per Table
5 on page 15 of the COD.
b. Please clarify the types and sizes of recreation facilities proposed between Blocks 4A and 4B (i.e. pool, tot lot,
basketball courts). If indoor fitness facilities or meeting spaces will be provided in any of the buildings, this counts
toward the minimum recreation square footage of required recreation space. Comment not fully addressed. Please
clarify the "Amenity Area" portion of the "Site Use Area Tabulations" on Sheet C-102. No non-residential
square footage/use is being provided in Block 4 according to this final site plan. Recreational uses are classified
as ancillary uses and do not count against the maximum permitted non-residential square footage. Is the
"Other" figure supposed to represent the area of open space that will be provided in Block 4 to meet the
minimum recreation requirements?
c. Sheet C-102 states that a 16,000 square foot pool area is proposed, but this is not shown on the plans. Is this a
reference to the pool proposed in Block 4A? Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2 (b)] Please state the permitted and proposed gross residential density of Block 4/413 in the Zoning and Site Tabulations
table on Sheet C-102. Per Table 5 Density Regulations (page 15) of the Code of Development, the permitted density range of
Block 4 is 6-34 units/acre.
a. The total number of proposed residential dwelling units should be clearly stated in the density calculation. Comment
addressed.
b. Please state the proposed square footage of non-residential uses proposed in Block 4, and state the remaining available
non-residential use square footage allowed in Block 4, per Table 5 of the Code of Development. Comment not fully
addressed. No non-residential square footage/use is being provided in Block 4 according to this final site Dlan.
Recreational uses are classified as ancillary uses and do not count against the maximum permitted non-
residential square footaLie. The "RemaininLFAvailable Non -Residential" figure should be revised to state 15.000
sg.ft. per Table 5 on page 15 of the COD.
17. [32.5.2 (b)] No loading spaces are shown, will any be provided? Any loading spaces must meet the design standards specified
in Section 18-4.12.13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.1(c)] Please show the boundaries and dimensions of all Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes and wetland areas on the
site plan. Comment not fully addressed. Preserved steep slopes are not shown across all drawings. Please revise the
1p ans.
19. [32.5.2 (f)] Please state whether the property lies within a water supply watershed on Sheet C-102. Comment addressed.
20. [32.7.7 & ZMA2015000071 There was a comment made in error regarding recreational requirements during the review of
the initial site plan for Block 4A. Please refer to the attached PDF titled Brookhill Zoning Map Amendment ZMA2015-007 —
Requestfor Substitution ofRequired Recreational Amenities, dated 9/21/2015, revised May 16, 2016, and prepared by Collins
Engineering. Comment addressed.
a. This request was approved to allow the proposed substitutions to the minimum civic space and recreation
requirements listed in Section 2.4.3 of the Code of Development. It allowed a substitution of the specific types of
amenities required for recreational purposes. The Proposed Amenities listed in each Civic Space are the specific
recreational items that can go in the parks to meet the County's minimum recreational requirements. This substitution
request did not waive the minimum 10,000 sq. ft. recreational amenity requirement for the first 650 apartments in
Brookhill as required by the Code of Development. Comment addressed.
b. Per Section 2.4.3 of the Code of Development, 10,000 sq. ft. of recreational space must be provided with the multi-
family development portion of Block 4. The recreation requirement can be a combination of the amenities listed in
the table on page 22 of the Code of Development. Based on the proposed pool square footage listed on Sheet C-102,
9
it appears that this requirement is being met between Blocks 4A/4B. Please verify whether there will be any other
square footage of recreational amenities provided in Blocks 4A/4B, including indoor gyms that may be located inside
of the leasing office, indoor or outdoor meeting space, etc. Prior to final site plan approval for either block, the plans
must demonstrate that a minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. of recreational amenities are provided between these blocks.
Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.2 (e)] Please provide more details about the existing landscape features as described in Section 18-32.7.9.4(c). Sheet C-
401 shows grading within the 30' planted/reforested portion of the buffer and some areas of the 70' undisturbed buffer.
a. [ZMA201500007 and 32.5.2 (e)] In accordance with page 33 of the Code of Development Section 3.2.3, please
provide the locations, species, and sizes of existing trees with diameter at breast heights greater than 18 inches within
the Route 29 buffer and the greenway area at the north of Block 4B. Comment not fully addressed. The existing
conditions, grading, and landscaping drawings do not identify any qualifying vegetation. Please verify whether
these features exist, and if so, show the locations, species, and sizes of existing trees with diameter at breast
heights greater than 18 inches within the Route 29 buffer and the greenway area at the north of Block 4B.
b. Staff has been informed that the existing treeline does not occupy the entire 70' portion. As discussed via email with
Ryan Yauger on July 28, 2017, the applicants were to provide an arborist report or drawings that show the species,
density, and locations of existing vegetation in the 70' portion. The applicants stated that they may need to perform
some grading in the 70' portion of Block 4A, and staff stated that disturbances to the 70' buffer may be permitted if
additional landscaping needs to be installed. However, this will require approval from the Director of Community
Development, as specified in Section 2.4.2 (page 19) of the Code of Development. Comment addressed.
c. The Albemarle County Conservation Plan Checklist and Chapter 3.38 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
handbook. The Conservation Plan Checklist will need to be signed by the owners and provided as an exhibit on the
final site plan for Blocks 4A/4B. Comment not fully addressed. Please provide a signed version of the
Conservation Plan Checklist as an inset somewhere on the landscaping plans.
22. [32.5.2 (a)] The building setback lines shown on the plans are incorrect, per Table 2.3.2.2 of the Code of Development.
Please amend the minimum and maximum setback line locations across all applicable drawings. Label each setback line as a
front, side, corner side, or rear setback and state the dimensions in the label. Setbacks should be measured from the proposed
right-of-way. Comment not fully addressed. The setback lines may need to be amended pending BOS approval of the
variation to the setback requirements of Block 4.
23. 132.5.2 (n)] Please add sidewalks within the driveway that connect to the Road A sidewalks on the final site plan. Comment
addressed.
24. 132.5.2 (n)] Pedestrian crosswalks must be provided at all locations within the site where ramps connect sidewalks on opposite
sides of vehicular travel ways. Comment addressed.
a. Please label the dimensions and surface materials in compliance with the County's design standards. Comment
addressed.
25. [32.5.2 (n)] On the site plan drawings, please label and call out the locations of the primary and secondary building entrances
to each apartment building in accordance with the Urban Density Residential block regulations Section 2.2.2 (page 10) of the
Code of Development. Comment addressed.
a. Depending on building entrance locations, additional sidewalks may be required to connect entrances to the sidewalks
within the Stella Lane and Road A right of ways. Comment addressed.
26. [32.5.2 (n)] Please provide dimensions of the trash compactor/dumpster pad area in compliance with the minimum design
standards set forth in Section 4.12.19 of the Zoning Ordinance. It does not appear that the concrete pad required by Section
4.12.19 extends at least 8' past the end of the compactor. Comment addressed.
27. [32.5.2 (n)] Will the trash compactor be located within a roofed/walled enclosure? Dumpster pads must be screened in
accordance with Section 32.7.9. Please provide a cut -sheet detail on the final site plan showing the dimensions and materials
of any constructed enclosures that will be used to screen the compactor. Comment not fully addressed. Please see ARB
comments.
10
28. 132.5.2 (k)] Please show the location of all proposed sewer and drainage easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width
measurement. Comment addressed.
29. 132.5.2 (1)] Please show the location of all proposed utility easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width measurement.
Comment addressed.
30. 132.5.2 (n)] Please state the proposed surface materials for all parking lots, travel ways, walkways, etc. in a label on the site
plan drawings. Comment addressed.
31. [32.7.9] All required street trees within the right of way of Stella Lane and Road A will be reviewed and approved with the
road plan application, SUB201700117. The final site plan should contain labels stating which landscaping items are proposed
with the Block 4/4B site plan, and which are part of the road plan application. Comment addressed.
32. 132.5.2 (n)] Please state the height of all proposed fences and retaining walls in the labels used on the drawings. Profile view
details of all proposed fences, retaining walls, and constructed screening measures will be required with the final site plan.
Each will need to show the types of materials used and dimensions. Comment addressed.
33. [32.7.9] Please move the Landscaping notes in the Zoning and Site Tabulations table on Sheet C-102 to the Landscape
drawings. Refer to the following comments #38-40 below for changes to the current calculations shown. Comment
addressed.
34. [32.7.9.6 (a)] Please revise the calculation for the minimum number of trees required within the parking area based on the
number of proposed parking spaces on Sheet C-702. 305 parking spaces are required, which means 31 trees must be provided
in the parking area. As a reminder, one (1) large or medium shade tree is required per ten (10) parking spaces or portion
thereof. Comment not fully addressed. Sheet C-703 states that 31 parking lot trees are provided in the lot for Block 4B,
but staff only counts 30 trees on the Landscape Plan. Please verify the quantity provided and revise the trees provided
column if necessary.
35. [32.7.9] Please revise the calculations on Sheet C-702. The landscape schedules do not include a column that states the
canopy coverage area per plant species. The canopy area for each species can be found on the Albemarle County
Recommended Plants List and Albemarle County Plants Canopy Calculations tables. PDFs of these documents can be
accessed through the Department of Community Development webpage: LINK.
a. Staff cannot verify if the provided trees meet the minimum 5% canopy required for the parking lot without the canopy
figures shown on the drawings. Comment addressed.
36. [32.7.9.8 (a)] On Sheet C-702, please provide a calculation for the minimum tree canopy required and proposed in Block 4B
based on the proposed density of residential uses. It appears that the proposed density of Block 4B is 22.79 du/acre, which
means that the minimum tree canopy is 10%.
a. [32.7.9.8 (b)] Please provide a Landscape Schedule on Sheet C-702 that lists the Botanical Name and Common Name
of each species is included, the proposed caliper and height at time of installation, and the canopy coverage area per
plant species as stated on the Albemarle County Plants Canopy Calculations. Comment not fully addressed. Please
see ARB comment regarding revisions to the Landscape Schedule calculations on Sheet C-703.
37. 132.5.2 (p)] Please revise the Buffer Compliance Chart on Sheet C-702. It should state that the buffer requirements come
from the approved ZMA201500007 Code of Development. Comment addressed.
38. [32.7.9.91 Please add a note to the Landscape plans stating "All landscaping shall be installed by the first planting season
following the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within the development." Comment addressed.
39. [32.7.9.91 Please add a note to the Landscape plans stating "All landscaping and screening shall be maintained in a healthy
condition by the current owner or a property owners' association, and replaced when necessary. Replacement material shall
comply with the approved landscape plan." Comment addressed.
40. [32.6.2 (h)] Please provide a signature panel with a line for each member of the Site Review Committee. A copy of the SRC
11
signature panel template is attached. Comment addressed.
41. [32.7.8 and 4.17] The final site plan will need to include a lighting plan showing all proposed outdoor lighting locations,
luminaire types, heights, footcandle measurements inside of the property and along all proposed property lines, and include
manufacturer specifications demonstrating compliance with full -cutoff standards in accordance with Section 4.17 of the
Zoning Ordinance. Comment not fully addressed.
The Lighting Plan shows footcandle spillover exceeding the maximum permitted 0.5 footcandles within the Archer
Avenue public right of way adiacent to Block 4B, and within the Stella Lane public right of way adjacent to Block 4A.
Please revise the plans so that the maximum footcandle measurement within any portion of public right of ways does
not exceed 0.5 footcandles.
The Luminaire Schedules on Sheets C-704 and C-705 do not provide the lumens of the three proposed luminaires.
This information must be shown to verify compliance with Section 4.17.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Please add a column to the Luminaire Schedules on Sheets C-704 and C-705 stating the lamp type (e.g. LED, metal
halide, fluorescent, etc.) to verify compliance with Section 4.17.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Please provide documentation that any luminaire exceeding 3,000 lumens will be equipped with a full cutoff shield, in
compliance with Section 4.17.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
42. [32.5.2 (o) and ZMA201500007] Table 2 on page 6 of the Code of Development identifies the minimum Greenspace/amenity
area requirements that must be met in Block 4 (0.2 acres of civic/parks, 3.4 acres of greenway, 1.9 acres of open space, 2.9
acres of buffer). The approved Application Plan shows a portion of the required 3.4 acre greenway located within Block 4B.
a. The site plan does not identify the greenspace (particularly the greenway) area boundary. Please identify the overall
greenspace boundary on the drawings and label "greenspace and future greenway area per ZMA20150007 Code of
Development." Comment not fully addressed. Please show the greenway and greenspace boundary across all
drawings and include a label.
b. Per Section 2.4 and 2.4.1 on page 18 of the Code of Development, the greenway encompasses all land within the 100
foot stream buffer, wetlands, and all land located within the floodplain. Are any of these features located within the
proposed parcel boundary of Block 413? If so, identify them on the plans. Comment not fully addressed. The final
site plan does not specify whether these features are within the proposed parcel boundary of Block 4. The
Brookhill Application Plan shows some open space within Block 4 boundaries. Will the new parcel boundary
of Block 4B include some of the open space area shown on the Application Plan that lies outside of the future
greenway area? In order to minimize issues with the minimum acreage of greenspace required in Block 4, staff
suggests incorporating some of the open space outside of the greenway into the northern portion of the Block
4B parcel that is currently under review as a two -lot division. Please see comment #42c below for additional
information.
c. Please expand the Block Area Summary on Sheet C-106 to include all the columns contained in Table 2 of the
Code of Development. The proposed acreages of each feature should also be stated so that staff can verify
compliance with the minimum requirements for greenspace/amenities, as well as the development area
requirements (maximum 19.0 acres overall through Block 4). Comment not fully addressed. Per Table 2 on Page
6 of the Code of Development, no block size shall be modified more than 15% of the gross land area shown in
Table 2. Sheet C-106 says that the proposed Block 4 total acreage is 21.6 acres, which is a 21% modification.
Additionally, the Block Area Summary does not state the proposed acreage of Greenspace/Amenities being
provided in Block 4. The 100' Route 29 buffer is a portion of the required minimum open space. In order to
address the COD requirements for providing the minimum acreage of greenspace in Block 4, an easement
must be recorded over the 100' Route 29 buffer in Block 4 with a deed that dedicates it to the Brookhill
HOA. Please submit an easement plat to be reviewed, approved, and recorded.
d. Per proffer #2A, the greenway portion of the overall greenspace area must be dedicated to the County for public use
through a deed of dedication and easement but not prior to the issuance of the 500' permit for a dwelling within the
project. The proffer states that portions of the greenway may be voluntarily dedicated sooner through a subdivision
plat. Please provide more information on the anticipated timing and method of dedication for the public greenway
easement within Block 4B. Comment not fully addressed. Please respond to this comment letter and provide a
12
timeline for when the greenway will be dedicated. It could partially be done now in order to satisfy the
minimum greenspace acreage required in Block4 (as mentioned in the above comment) or it could be done
later. Please do not hesitate to contact staff with questions about these comments.
43. [ZMA201500007] The site plan is proposing to count the parking spaces inside of the garages and the spaces in front of the
garages toward meeting the required minimum parking count. Will the garages be leased in combination with specific units
(so that lessees have designated parking spaces)? It is possible that these parking spaces may not county toward meeting the
minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance if the garages and the associated stacked parking will not be assigned to
specific units upon rental. Comment not fully addressed. This requested information was not provided. Please verify
whether the garages will be leased in combination with specific units (so that lessees have designated parking spaces).
It is possible that these parking spaces may not county toward meeting the minimum requirement of the Zoning
Ordinance if the garages and the associated stacked parking will not be assigned to specific units upon rental.
44. [ZMA201500007] Section 2.13 of the Code of Development states that the historic marker to commemorate the Brookhill
manor house shall be installed with the first phase of development. Please provide Planning & Zoning staff with information
on whether this marker will be installed and shown as a feature on the final site plan for Blocks 4A/413 or Block 3. As a
reminder, the Code of Development requires the marker to be installed either within the public right of way or public open
space, and it shall be designed in accordance with DHR guidelines for design and character of the historic marker. Comment
addressed. The historic marker will be installed along the public road leading to Block 3A, which is currently under
road plan application and final site plan application review.
45. [ZMA201500007 — Proffer #IE] Please provide an update regarding the proposed timing for construction and installation
of the transit stop. The Brookhill Application Plan shows a generalized location for the transit stop at the northeast corner of
the traffic circle at the intersection of Archer Avenue and Stella Lane. The proffer states that the transit stop shall feature
certain improvements including a shelter, rest bench, pedestrian access, and signage. Furthermore, the stop shall be installed
and completed concurrently with the installation of roads and sidewalks within Block 1. Comment not fully addressed. The
road plans for Stella Lane and Archer Avenue are under review. Per the last road plan application review, staff
requested that a pull -off be added to Stella Lane to accommodate a bus stop/future transit stop. This comment will be
addressed once SUB201700117 is approved.
a. Please contact the County's transportation planner, Kevin McDermott, at kmcdermottgalbemarle.org or 434-296-
5832 ext. 3414 for assistance with coordinating the stop location and design with Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT).
Please contact Cameron Langille at the Department of Community Development at blan ig lle(c-r�,albemarle.org or 296-
5832 ext. 3432 for further information.
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — Emily Cox, ecox(cr�,albemarle.org— Requested Changes, see
attached.
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — Elise Kiewra, ekiewragalbemarle.org — Requested Changes, see
attached.
Albemarle County Building Inspections — Michael Dellinger, mdellingerkalbemarle.org — Requested Changes:
Retaining walls greater than 3 feet in height require a separate building permit. Walls exceeding 4 feet in height
require an stamped engineered design also.
Albemarle County Planning Services (Architectural Review Board) — Heather McMahon, hmcmahonkalbemarle.org
— Requested Changes, see attached.
13
Albemarle County Service Authority — Richard Nelson, rnelsongserviceauthority.or — Requested Changes, see
attached.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — Shawn Maddox, smaddox(&albemarle.org — Final site plan still under
review by Fire & Rescue. Comments or approvals will be sent to the applicant upon receipt.
Virginia Department of Transportation — Adam Moore, Adam.Moorekydot.vir ig nia.gov — Final site plan still
under review by VDOT Comments or approvals will be sent to the applicant upon receipt.
14
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Cameron Langille
From: Emily Cox
Date: 25 July 2018
Subject: Brookhill Block 4A & 4B — (SDP201800050)
The final site plan for Brookhill — Blocks 4A & 4B has been reviewed by Engineering. The following
comments will need to be addressed before approval:
1. WPO Plan must be approved before final site plan can be approved.
2. Road Plan must be approved before final site plan can be approved.
3. VDOT approval is necessary before site plan can be approved.
4. Show steep slopes on all applicable sheets.
5. Show stormwater management facility easements. These will need to be recorded with a
deed. These are intended to be processed with the subdivision plat of Archer and Stella
Lane, correct?
6. There is no existing 100 buffer on the northern end of the site. Please remove label. This
is proposed greenspace/buffer or open space.
7. Sidewalk adjacent to parking should be 6' wide, unless bumper blocks are provided. See
design standards manual, section 7.C.
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms_center/departments/community developm
ent/forms/design standards _manual/Albemarle _Coun1y Design Standards_ Manual_2015
-04-25 draft.pdf
8. Label all 3:1 and 2:1 slopes.
9. Proposed 2:1 slopes must specify low maintenance (not grass) ground cover. Please note
this on the landscape sheets.
10. Provide drainage divide sheet for the storm pipes. This was included in the WPO plan,
but should accompany the pipe calculations.
11. Label proposed curbing (CG-6, etc.)
12. Provide dumpster/trash compactor pad detail.
13. The location of loading spaces is not clear. Please label and show dimensions.
14. Per the COD, Page 23, provide final design of retaining walls and approval to be over 6
feet in height.
15. Retaining wall should not be so close to stormwater facility and easement. There must be
enough space for equipment/maintenance of stormwater facility. See Section 6 of the
Design Standards Manual equipment landing graphic.
16. Show the handicap parking areas on the grading plan with spots verifying ADA compliant
grading.
17. Storm drain easements are not necessary on all pipes. They are needed for stormwater
management facilities and public systems. See Section 6 of the Design Standards Manual.
Contact engineering with any questions.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
18. Provide calculations for the ditches going to the level spreader.
19. Provide Rip -rap sizing calculations.
20. Show HGL line on storm profiles. Also, provide VDOT form LD-347 for HGL
calculations. It appears rim elevation was missing on sheet C-808.
11
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development`_
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS - E911
APPLICATION#: SDP201800050
TMP: 046000000019133 (portion), 046000000019134 (portion)
046000000019131 (portion)
DATE: 7/20/2018
FROM: Elise Kiewra
ekiewra@albemarle.org
Geographic Data Services (GDS)
www.albemarle.org/gds
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3030
STELLA LN and ARCHER AVE have been reserved
One (1) road name will be needed for each set of apartment buildings (one for 4A and
one for 413). See screenshots below.
This site will require a one (1) new private road name for Road "A". 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."
We recommend providing three (3) candidate names for each road 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:
https://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms Center/Departments/Geographic Data Service
s/Forms/Road Naming and Property Numbering Ordinance and Manual.pdf
Please consult the County's Road Name Index to check your road names prior to submittal. The
Index can be found here: httD://www.albemarle.ora/albemarle/upload/imaaes/webaDDs/roads/
Parcel and mapping information can be found here: http://gisweb.albemarle.or
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
a
R
—
I �r
LLI
x.�41 1 S t
11
n4ioa_4a`"�rY T' s r _
- 1
- — — i 1 -4-r S t
I
�e� ��.------------- ---------------
�-- -------------j --- —
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(434) 296 - 5823
Fax (434) 972 - 4012
Date: July 16, 2018
Time: 1:00 PM
Meeting Room: Room 241, Second Floor
Members:
Staff:
ARB ACTION MEMO
Frank Stoner: Absent
Frank Hancock: Present
Bruce Wardell, Chair: Present (Arrived at 1:04 p.m.)
Stan Binsted, Vice Chair: Present
Dade Van Der Werf: Present
Heather McMahon
Margaret Maliszewski
Sharon Taylor
CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Binsted called the meeting to order at 1:03 p.m. and established a quorum.
DISCLOSURES
Mr. Binsted invited disclosures. There being none, the meeting moved to the next item.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mr. Binsted invited public comment. There being none, the meeting proceeded.
REGULAR REVIEW ITEMS
a. ARB-2018-83: Brookhill Blocks 4A and 4B Final - Final Site Development Plan (046000000019A0,
04600000001961).
Albemarle County Architectural Review Board Final Action Memo July 16, 2018 1
Proposal: To develop blocks 4A and 4B with nine multi -family apartment buildings, parking areas, and
associated improvements.
Location: East side of Seminole Trail (Rt. 29 N) and north side of Polo Grounds Road (Rt. 643). Forest Lakes
Community is to the north and Montgomery Ridge is to the east.
The ARB offered the following comments on the proposal:
1. Submit material and color samples for review.
2. Revise the elevation sheets to include a key that illustrates to which building wall on the overall
site plan the elevation corresponds.
3. Provide floor plans of each building, by floor, not the individual units.
4. Provide color renderings of Buildings A and B as seen from the entrance of Archer Avenue at Rt.
29
5. Add plantings as described for 30' within the VDOT right-of-way to screen the stormwater
management facility, contingent on VDOT approval.
6. Clarify the metal eyebrow feature and provide a materials and color sample.
7. Include the location of the proposed mail kiosk and any other proposed accessory structure on
the site plans (C-301 and C-302).
8. Provide additional evergreen landscaping in the vicinity of the trash compactor on block 4B to
eliminate its visibility from the EC. Provide dumpster/compactor screening details in the plan.
9. Provide a roof plan and elevations that show all proposed roof -mounted mechanical equipment.
Provide sight line drawings to confirm that the equipment can't be seen from the street.
10. Provide all proposed utilities on the Utility Plan (C-501 and C-502).
11. Provide the Existing Conditions and Demolition plans (C-201, C-202, and C-203) with a revised site
plan set for review.
12. Provide the heights, materials, and details of any new proposed fencing on the site for review.
Chain link is not appropriate.
13. Indicate the color of the retaining wall block on the plans. Provide a sample for review. Clarify if
the wall detail applies to all proposed retaining walls.
14. Provide the standard mechanical equipment note in the General Notes on C-101 of the site plan
set: Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.
15. Revise the lighting plan to eliminate spillover in excess of .5 fc at the property line along Stella
Lane and Archer Avenue
16. Revise the lighting plans to include any proposed wall -mounted lighting. Submit manufacturer's
specifications and cut sheets for any proposed wall -mounted lighting for review.
17. Provide total lumens in the luminaire schedule for all proposed lights.
18. Provide a cut sheet for all proposed fixture types showing all options chosen. Identify the color
finishes in the cut sheets.
19. Provide a note on the lighting plan that 18 feet is the maximum mounting height from grade
inclusive of the base.
20. Revise the architectural elevations of the buildings and structures to include the placement and
mounting heights of the proposed light fixtures.
21. Provide photometric values for all proposed lights in which the LLF is equal to 1.0.
22. Rectify the lighting plans to illustrate the same number of proposed lighting fixtures as listed in
the quantity field of the luminaire schedule.
Albemarle County Architectural Review Board Final Action Memo July 16, 2018 2
23. Provide the standard lighting note on the lighting plans (C-704 and C-705): 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.
24. Provide sufficient planting room between the west (side) elevation of the southwestern building
[in Block 4131 and the eastern edge of the 30-foot planting buffer zone in order to ensure that the
entirety of the 30-foot buffer is appropriately landscaped.
25. Provide the trees on Stella Lane and Archer Avenue at 2%" caliper at planting, spaced 40' on center
on average.
26. Include the trees and shrubbery on Stella Lane and Archer Avenue to the plant schedules on the
landscape plans (C-701, C-702, and C-703). Provide their botanical and common names,
quantities, calipers. Alternatively, provide the road plans for ARB landscape review.
27. Provide additional perimeter parking trees so that the average planting distance is 40 feet on
center. Ensure that the calipers for these trees are 2.5 inches at planting.
28. Provide 8 additional interior parking trees to Block 4B and 1 additional interior parking tree to
Block 4A.
29. Ensure and demonstrate that there are no potential utility conflicts between the proposed
locations of underground utilities and the proposed locations of large shade trees.
30. Provide the 50'-deep landscape buffer between the west (side) elevation of the northwestern
building in Block 4B and the VDOT stormwater management facility as required by the Code of
Development. Alternatively, plant 30' of buffer between the EC and the stormwater management
facility.
31. Include viburnum x rhytidophyllum with the deciduous shrubs and betula nigra with large
deciduous trees in all plant schedules.
32. Combine the two separate plant schedules on C-703.
33. Reduce the number of IGC and TMD so that they do not exceed the 25% of the total for that
species (evergreen shrubs).
34. Provide the exact wording of the standard plant health note on the landscape 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.
35. Address the rear yard setback minimum as required by the Code of Development.
36. Include a note with the retaining wall details indicating that the details apply to all proposed
retaining walls.
37. Indicate on the plan the proposed color of the retaining wall block. Include a fence detail in the
plan, including material and color.
38. Revise the site plans to show adequate tree protection fencing.
39. Provide a signed tree conservation checklist with the site plant set.
40. Show the 30-foot and 70-foot landscape buffer lines on the grading plans, C-401 and C-402.
WORK SESSION
a. ARB-2018-72: Pantops Corner Hotel
Contacts: Justin Shimp, Mike McGowan, Nitin Kulkarni, Tarun Patel
Albemarle County Architectural Review Board Final Action Memo July 16, 2018 3
The ARB held a work session on the visibility and orientation of the proposed hotel relative to the Rt. 20
Entrance Corridor, based on new information submitted by the applicant. The ARB offered to hold another
work session on the issue and provided the following comments:
1. The flat roof is an improvement.
2. Consider an alternate surface treatment for the wall area inside the frame.
3. Regarding the orientation of the building to Rt. 20, the terrace is a positive gesture, but there should
be a response in the form and mass of the building, not just in the landscape.
4. Continue to study the impact of the height and scale.
5. The design does not appear to address several of the EC guidelines regarding landscaping and grading.
6. The character of the Rt. 250 EC differs from the character of the Rt. 20 EC.
7. An I -shaped, bent, or angled building configuration could address the Rt. 20 EC better.
8. Can the building step more?
9. The towers have visual weight that isn't supported from below.
10. Consider making the building elements relate thematically.
OTHER BUSINESS
a. Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines: Glass
This item was deferred to the next ARB meeting.
b. Approval of Minutes: 7-2-2018
Motion: Mr. Binsted moved for approval of the minutes for 7-2-2018.
Mr. Hancock seconded the motion.
The motion carried by a vote of 4:0. (Stoner absent)
Next ARB Meeting: August 6, 2018, 1:00 p.m.
Mr. Van Der Werf stated that he might not be able to attend the August 6 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 2:32 p.m. to the next ARB meeting on Monday, August 6, 2018 in Room
241, Second Floor, County Office Building at 1:00 p.m.
Albemarle County Architectural Review Board Final Action Memo July 16, 2018 4
Cameron Langille
From: Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2018 8:26 AM
To: Cameron Langille
Subject: RE: SDP201800050 - Brookhill Block 4A and 4B Apartments - Final Site Plan - Electronic
Review
Cameron,
SDP201800050 - Brookhill Block 4A and 4B Apartments - Final Site Plan is currently under water and sewer
review. Approval of this plan is contingent on the approval of the Polo Grounds Road and Brookhill Section 1 Road
Plans. An updated master plan and hydraulic model will be required prior to final approval.
Thanks,
Richard Nelson
Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
(434) 977-4511
From: Cameron Langille [mailto:blangille@albemarle.org]
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 3:00 PM
To: Frank Pohl <fpohl@albemarle.org>; Emily Cox <ecox@albemarle.org>; Matthew Wentland
<mwentland@albemarle.org>; John Anderson <janderson2@albemarle.org>; Shawn Maddox
<smaddox@albemarle.org>; Michael Dellinger <mdellinger@albemarle.org>; Elise Kiewra <ekiewra@albemarle.org>;
Heather McMahon <hmcmahon@albemarle.org>; Margaret Maliszewski <MMal iszewski@albemarle.org>; Rebecca
Ragsdale <rragsdale@albemarle.org>; Richard Nelson <rnelson@serviceauthority.org>; Moore, Adam PE (VDOT)
<Adam.Moore@vdot.virginia.gov>
Subject: SDP201800050 - Brookhill Block 4A and 4B Apartments - Final Site Plan - Electronic Review
Good Afternoon,
You all should have just received an email from Bluebeam for an invitation to a studio review session for the Brookhill
Block 4A/4B Apartments Final Site Plan.
This is an electronic review. The Bluebeam studio session number is 085-740-851. A PDF of the final site plan is available
for you to view in the Bluebeam session.
Your review comments are due to me by Monday, July 23, 2018. You may enter your comments into Countyview under
your name or send them directly to me via email.
For those of you who do not have Bluebeam review software, please use the following link to the Countyview system to
access a PDF of the final site plan. Please be aware that this is a large file and it will take several moments to load in
your web browser. http://www.abemarle.org/weblink/search.aspx?dbid=3&searchcommand=%7b%SbCDD-
Planning%Sd:%5bApplicationNumber%5d=%22SDP201800050%22%7d
Please let me know if you have problems accessing the PDF file and starting your review.
Thanks,
Cameron
Cameron Langille
Senior Planner
Department of Community Development
Albemarle County, VA
434-296-5832 (ext. 3432)
blangille@albemarle.org