COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE

PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY

 

Project Name:  SDP 06 –071 Gillispie Preliminary Site Plan

Staff:  Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner; Allan Schuck, Senior Civil Engineer

Public Hearing:  May 8, 2007

 

Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:  Not applicable

Owners:  Brian B. and Jennifer M. Gillispie

Applicant: Clark Gathright

Acreage: 1.71 Acres

Rezone from: NA

Special Use Permit for:  NA

TMP:   061K0-10-00-000A0 and 061K0-10-00-000A2

Location: At the end of Inglewood Drive [Route 1411], 300 feet west of its intersection with North Berkshire Road [Route 1431]

By-right use: R4 Residential

Magisterial District:  Jack Jouett

Proffers/Conditions:  Yes

Proposal:  Request for Preliminary Site Plan approval to allow the construction of a residential condominium unit totaling 5,544 square feet and 7 total dwelling units on 1.71 acres; will require a waiver of Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, which restricts earth-disturbing activity on critical slopes.

Requested # of Dwelling Units:  Seven (7)

 

DA (Development Area): Yes

RA (Rural Area): No

Comprehensive Plan Designation:

Neighborhood Density in Urban Area 7

Character of Property:  The property is mostly wooded with trees and areas of critical slopes. There is a house/dwelling on the property.

Use of Surrounding Properties:  Single Family Residential dwellings

Factors Favorable:

(see report)

 

Factors Unfavorable:

(see report)

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of the modification of Section 4.2.3.2.

 


 

STAFF PERSON:                              Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner; Allan Schuck, Senior Civil Engineer

PLANNING COMMISSION:          May 8, 2007

 

AGENDA TITLE:                             SDP 06 – 071: Gillispie Preliminary Site Plan

 

APPLICANT:                                     Clark Gathright (Daggett and Grigg Architects)

PROPERTY OWNER(S):                 Brian B. and Jennifer M. Gillispie                             

 

APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL:  

 

Request for Preliminary Site Plan to allow the construction of a residential condominium unit totaling 5,544 square feet, and 7 total dwelling units on 1.71 acres, zoned R4 (Residential).  The property is described as Tax Map 61K, Section 10, Parcels A and A2, and is located in the Jack Jouett Magisterial District at the end of Inglewood Drive[Route 1411], 300 feet west of its intersection with North Berkshire Road [Route 1431]. Preliminary site plan approval will require a waiver of section 4.2.3.2, which restricts earth-disturbing activity on critical slopes.

 

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:

The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Neighborhood Density in Urban Area 7.

 

PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: 

SUB 1998020 – Peter Williams Family Division – Signed October 20th, 1997.

VIO-2006067 – There was a violation on the property for operating a business out of the existing house/dwelling that has since been abated.

SDP 06-071 (subject plan):

Planning Commission (12/12/2006) – Request for waivers to allow disturbance of critical slopes and a road standard without curb and gutter were denied by the Planning commission.

Board of Supervisors (02/07/2007) - The applicant appealed the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the critical slopes waiver to the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors heard the appeal on the indicated date (02/07/2007). Action on the critical slopes waiver was deferred by the Board of Supervisors when the applicant, Daggett and Grigg Architects, on behalf of the owner Mr. and Mrs. Gillispie, agreed to revise the plan to meet Albemarle County Engineering approval. Upon revision, the critical slopes waiver would go back to the Planning Commission for approval.

 

REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:

 

A)    A waiver of section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, which restricts earth-disturbing activity on critical slopes. Section 4.2.5.b of the Zoning Ordinance allows the Planning Commission to waive this restriction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A) REVIEW OF MODIFICATION OF SECTION 4.2.3.2 TO ALLOW ACTIVITY ON CRITICAL SLOPES.

 

The proposed development includes activity on critical slopes.  Staff has reviewed this request as required by Sections 4.2 and 4.2.5 of the ordinance.  This review is divided into two parts, a review for impact on aesthetic resources and a review of the engineering impacts. 

 

Before this proposal may be approved, a modification to allow critical slopes disturbance is necessary.  The request for a modification has been reviewed for both Engineering and Planning aspects.   

 

Review of the request by Current Development Planning Staff.

 

This review is focused on the criteria in Section 4.2 and the potential loss of aesthetic resources.  The critical slopes on this site are shown on the “inventory map” but not on the composite map for Urban Area six and seven. The critical slopes on the site are not part of a system, and based on the exclusion of these slopes in the composite map, staff does not view the disturbance of these slopes as a potential loss of critical resources.

 

Review of the request by Current Development Engineering Staff.

 

The critical slope area, within TMP 61K-10-A2 and 61K-10-A, appears to be natural slopes.  The critical slope disturbances are in the form of site plan construction; accessways, stormwater facilities, and structures. 

 

 

Areas

Acres

Total site in Project

1.79

Critical slopes

Approx. 0.65

Approx. 36.3% of development

Critical slopes disturbed

0.34

52% of critical slopes

 

 

Below, each of the concerns of Zoning Ordinance section 18-4.2 is addressed:

 

1.      “Movement of soil and rock”:   Required drainage items are located within five (5) feet of the adjacent properties.  Adequate perimeter erosion and sediment control measures to protect the neighboring properties will be needed. 

2.      “Excessive stormwater run-off”:   The site development creates several potential drainage problems.  The conceptual SWM facility has been relocated to direct the site’s runoff to the front travelway instead of to a facility in the rear of the site.  The build-out of the site as proposed will create additional problems at the entrance location onto Inglewood Drive.  This issue will be adequately addressed with the required SWM plan. 

 

 

 

3.       “Siltation of natural and man-made bodies of water”:   There are no existing streams located on the property.  There is an existing swale that traverses the property.  This plan proposes improvements to the existing swale to ensure adequate channels for the downstream property.  As shown, it is possible to provide adequate perimeter erosion and sediment control measures without encroachment onto neighboring properties.

4.       “Loss of aesthetic resource”:   This site is visible from adjoining property owners in this community.  The site has existing wooded areas throughout the property.  It appears that the loss of aesthetic resources will be necessary with the proposed plan.

5.      “Septic effluent”:   Septic systems or drainfields are not proposed in this project.  This site is accessible to the public sanitary sewer system.

 

The plan has been revised as follows:

 

The access to the site has been relocated and designed with curb and gutter that meets the requirements of the ordinance.

 

The original two buildings have been reconfigured into one which decreases the amount of disturbance of critical slopes and provides adequate area for the installation of erosion control measures at the perimeter of the site.

 

The drainage is redirected through the proposed entrance to the site into the existing public drainage system rather than piping drainage towards an adjacent property. The existing swale carrying off-site drainage shall not be disturbed.

 

 

This site does not drain into a waterway that is a public drinking water supply for Albemarle County.  No portion of this site plan is located inside the 100-year flood plain area according to FEMA Maps, dated 04 February 2005.

 

Engineering recommends approval of this critical slopes waiver request.   

 

Section 4.2.5(b):

Section 4.2.5 establishes the review process and criteria for granting a modification of Section 4.2.3.2.  The preceding comments by staff address the provisions of Section 4.2.5a.  Staff has included the provisions of Section 4.2.5b (in italics) here, along with staff comment on the various provisions.

 

b. The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that: (Amended 11-15-89)

 

1.         Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare, or that alternatives proposed by the developer would satisfy the purposes of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree; or (Added 11-15-89)

 

            There are no proposed alternatives presented by the developer that would satisfy the purpose of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree.

 

2.         Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the requirements of section 4.2 would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or would result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties. Such modification or waiver shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, or to adjacent properties, or be contrary to sound engineering practices; or (Added 11-15-89)

 

            This revised plan shows a reduction in the amount of critical slope disturbance.  It shows one single building instead of two as previously proposed.  The SWM facility has been moved from the rear of the building.  The existing swale will not be channelized into a pipe.  The existing swale carrying offsite drainage will be disturbed, but the proposed improvements to the swale on the property should be enough to ensure adequate channels for the downstream property. Revisions made to the previously proposed preliminary site plan conform to sound engineering practices, and off site drainage will not result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties.

 

3.                  Granting such modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be served by strict application of section 4.2. (Added 11-15-89)

 

There are no immediately identifiable reasons that would be considered of greater import; however, the property is in a designated development area in the comprehensive plan.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

Staff finds that this request is consistent with the criteria of Section 4.2.5a for granting a modification. Additionally, the waiver conforms to sound engineering practices. Therefore, staff is able to recommend Planning Commission approval of the modification of Section 4.2.3.2. with the following conditions:

 

1)      The applicant must provide adequate storm water management (SWM) detention to meet the Water Protection Ordinance, Chapter 17, section 314 of the Albemarle County Code.

2)      To attain the required bonus density, the applicant must provide proof that areas under conservation will be maintained and all trees preserved.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS: (Attachments A through D)

A.                 Vicinity Map

B.                 Site Plan

C.                 Applicant’s Request Letter

D.                 Inventory Map

Return to exec summary