HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600058 Review Comments Major Amendment, Final Site Plan 2018-10-29COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Date: November 21, 2016
UPDATED: December 1, 2016
(includes zoning comments)
Rev. 1: April 10, 2017
Rev. 2: October 29, 2018
Tim Miller
Meridian Planning Group
440 Premium Circle
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SDP 201600058 Daly's Rent All — Major Amendment
Dear Sir:
Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be
approved the following revisions are required:
[32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(1) & 32.6.2(g)] it appears that there is an underground cable and a gas line in or
near the property. A buried cable warning marker is in the eastern corner of the property and there is
a gas line structure. in the western corner of the property. Shown all existing utilities and easements
that are within the property boundary. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. An existing gas pipeline
structure exists either within, or just adjacent to, the property in the western corner of the parcel. If
the structure, any associated gas lines, and/or any associated gas line easements are not within the
property then confirm that fact. If any of these are within the property the show them on the site plan
and provide the required information on the easement.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed. Applicant has shown a gas valve and stated that there is no
known easement.
[32.5.2(a)] Revise the setback information to include the side and rear minimum and maximum
setback requirements. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. The side and rear setbacks still to not
appear to be included in the building setback information on the cover sheet. Revise the building
setback information to include minimum and maximum setbacks for the side and rear lot lines when
abutting commercial or industrial districts.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. Address the following:
a) Show the setback information as it is specified in the County Code (18-4.20). This would
include:
• Front -Minimum (Building): 10 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the
sidewalk is outside of the right-of-way.
Page 1 of 6
• Front -Minimum (Parking and Loading): 10 feet from any public street right-of-way .
• Front -Maximum (Building): 30 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the
sidewalk is outside of the right-of-way,
• Side and Rear -Minimum (Primary Structure - if abutting lot is zoned commercial or industrial):
None (However building must be constructed and separated in accordance with the current Building
Code.)
• Side and Rear -Maximum: None
b) Remove the lines and labels for the side and rear setback from the site plan sheets. As
specified above, there is no side or rear minimum setback requirement when adjacent to
other commercial zones. There are only building construction and separation
requirements. If you wish for the side and rear "separation" lines to remain they should
not be labeled as "setback" but as "building separation".
13. [32.5.2(b)) Provide a note for the maximum amount of impervious cover on the site plan. Rev. 1:
Comment not fully addressed. A land use table has been added to the coversheet. However,
"impervious" is not specifically listed. Please include that specifically either in the table or in a note
below the table as "maximum impervious area". Also, the calculation should not have a total of
102%. Ensure that the areas total 100%.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2(e) & 32.6.20)] Provide on the existing condition sheet the existing landscape features within
the parcel. Also, show any existing landscape features that are to remain on the landscaping sheet
and differentiate them from the proposed landscaping. Provide the information specified in
32.7.9.4(c). If existing trees are to be counted towards the landscaping calculations also include the
information required in 32.7.9.4(b).
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following issues:
a) Because existing trees are to be utilized for the required landscaping calculations:
i. Provide a preservation Checklist, which must be filled out and signed before the
site plan can be approved.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. Completely fill out the
preservation checklist and have it signed and dated by the owner.
ii. Provide a tree preservation detail.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
iii. Show the tree protection fencing on the existing conditions and demolition,
grading and utility, and landscaping plan sheets.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
iv. Show the limits of clearing and grading on the existing conditions and demolition
and grading and utility sheets.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
V. The existing trees utilized to meet landscape requirements must be protected
and preserved.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. Provide tree protection fencing
along the edge of the property line where there are existing trees and
shrubs to remain on the adjoining lot adjacent to the limits of disturbance.
Please note that there are existing shrubs, along the property line, that are
shown to remain but are within the limits of disturbance.
b) The existing tree by the door of the existing building does not appear to be the same type
of tree as the others along the road. Correctly identify this tree and include the
appropriate information in the landscape schedule and landscape calculations.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(k) 8. 32.6.2(e)] Revise the locations of the storm drainage pipes and easements, or the
location of the proposed building (and footing), so that they do not conflict with each other. The
buildings and building footings must be outside of any existing or proposed easement. Rev. 1:
Comment not fully addressed. There is an existing portion of the stormwater pipe that is to remain
that is labeled as "Existing 15" Sanitary". Revise this label to correctly represent the type of pipe.
Page 2 of 6
Also, provide a label on sheet C-202 for the existing drainage easement in the western corner of the
property.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Revise the label for the New 20' Drainage Easement to include that the
easement is "Public". Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Revise the label for the New 20' Drainage
Easement on the north side of the parcel to include that the easement is "Public".
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. Address the following:
a) Show the existing "PUBLIC" easement as "Public", and include the deed book and page
number for the easement label, on the existing conditions sheet (C-101).
b) If an easement for the drainage pipe crossing the property, from the public drainage
easement outfall, exists revise the existing conditions (C-101) sheet to show the easement
and dimension its width include the deed book and page number for the easement in the
easement label.
19. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Submit an easement and a deed of easement and plat for the relocated 20'
Public Drainage Easement for review. County Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of
the Major Site Plan Amendment. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Submit an easement and a deed
of easement and plat for the relocated 20' Public Drainage Easement for review. County Attorney's
approval will be required prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet addressed. Submit an easement plat and a deed of easement for the
relocated 20' Public Drainage Easement for review. County Attorney's approval will be
required prior to approval of the Maior Site Plan Amendment. Attached please see a template
for this deed of easement.
20. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Submit a deed of easement for the proposed Storm Water Management
Basin SWM-1 and its outfall pipe. County Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of the
Major Site Plan Amendment. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Submit a deed of easement for the
proposed Storm Water Management Basin SWM-1 and its outfall pipe. County Attorney's approval
will be required prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet addressed. Submit an easement plat and a deed of easement for the
Storm Water Management Basin and 20' Public Drainage Easement for review. County
Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of the Maior Site Plan Amendment.
Engineering will forward the template for the deed of easement for this plat.
24. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the dumpster pad(s). Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. There appears to
be a problem with the doors and dimensions on the dumpster detail shown on sheet C-205. Revise
the detail to fix these problems.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
25. [32.5.2(n) & 32.6.2(k)] The plan specifies that there will be no outdoor lighting. If there are to be
any light fixtures on the exterior of the proposed building, or the addition or modification of light
fixtures on the existing building, those lights are considered outdoor lighting and information on those
light fixtures must be provided and the light fixtures must meet code requirements. Provide the
location and required information for any outdoor lighting.
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following issues:
a) The light fixtures are not shown in the same location on the Lighting Plan as they are on
the other plan sheets. Ensure that all sheets show them in the same location.
Rev. 2: Cornment addressed.
b) There appears to be an "F-2" light fixture but not an "F-1". Update the lighting plan so
that if there is only one "F" light fixture it is numbered "F-1".
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
Page 3 of 6
c) Provide information on the size of the light pole and base of "F2-2" or relocate light
fixture. On the Lighting Plan sheet fixture "F2-2" has been located in, or adjacent to, the
2' overhand area for vehicles in 16' deep parking spaces. The pole for the light fixture,
and the base if not flush to the ground, cannot be located within the 2' of parking
overhand.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Address the following:
i. Provide the overhang area (dashed outline) on all 16' deep parking spaces.
The both sets of the eight 16' spaces in the middle of the existing parking lot
do not show the dashed line area specifying the 2' overhang. Ensure that all
signage and light poles do not impact the 2' deep parking overhang area. If
there is exactly 4' from face of curb to face of curb between those parking -
areas the poles for the handicapped signage may block part of the overhangs
on one side or the other. The 2' overhand areas must be totally clear of
obstructions on both sides.
ii. Dimension the face of curb to face of curb distance between the two 16' deep
parking areas in the middle of the existing parking area. Ensure that there is
not only sufficient parking overhang area for both of the parking bays but also
sufficient area for all signage poles and light poles.
Ill. Ensure that the grading at the base of the modified CG-2 curbing, between the
two bays of 16' parking spaces, allows:
a. Sufficient room for the 2' overhang for lower of the two parking bays.
b. Sufficient space for the light poles and handicapped signage.
d) Confirm that the light fixtures will not be tilted.
Rev. 2: Comment not addressed. Comment response letter stated a note was
added to sheet C-203 (Landscaping Plan). No not appears to be either on sheet C-
203 or sheet C-204 (Lighting Plan). Address the comment. Add the note to the
Lighting Plan sheet (C-204).
33. [32.7.9 & 32.6.20)] Revise the landscape plan to meet all requirements of section 32.7.9. Address
the following comments:
a) Provide street trees along the entire length of the street frontage at 40' on center as specified
in the Entrance Corridor Guidelines for interior streets. The 513' street frontage should be
used to calculate the number of required street trees. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed.
The requirement for 40' on center, in this case, is from the Entrance Corridor Guidelines. For
the EC guideline it also specifies that the trees are to be large. Therefore, the medium trees
that have been specified along the road (Sassafras albidum) does not meet the requirement.
Revise the landscaping plan to provide large shade trees along the streets.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
b) If the hatched area on sheet C-203 is meant to represent the required parking lot planting
areas then either provide a label or legend specifying that. Provide plantings within the
parking lot planting spaces as required in 32.7.9.6. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed.
Provide additional landscaping in areas that are to meet the 5% requirement. There are two
"Landscape areas" of significant size that show only one tree proposed.
Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. Planting Area #6 appears to be on top of a new
parking space. When the loading space was moved the proposed curb lines were
adjusted to remove the previously proposed loading space and to create a new
parking space. Planting area #6 appears to not have been updated with the changes.
Revise the planting area and plant locations to no longer conflict with the parking
space.
Page 4 of 6
c) Provide the required parking lot trees. Trees utilized to meet the parking lot tree requirement
must be large or medium shade trees and be located adjacent to parking spaces. Rev. 1:
Comment not fully addressed. As specified in 32.7.9.6(a), areas of shrubs required by
section 32.7.9.5(e) shall be counted toward the minimum area of parking area landscaping.
Therefore, the area of landscaping that is for the parking space screening cannot be used to
meet the 5% area requirement in 32.7.9.6(a), Revise the landscaping plan so that the 5%
landscaping area does not include landscaping required in either 32.7.9.5(d) or (e).
Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. There appears to be a residual label for what
was a Blackgum Tree near the center of the front of the existing building and near the
Pignut Hickory tree. Remove this residual/extra label.
e) Provide additional shrubs to screen the parking spaces from the public street. The site plan
does not show the parking spaces near the proposed building and stormwater pond as being
screened from the public road. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Provide screening for
the five parking spaces near the road and adjacent to the stormwater pond. The additions of
screening shrubs in the planting bed adjacent to the side of the closest parking space would
meet this screening requirement.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
f) Provide screening for the stormwater detention pond (32.7.9.7). Rev. 1: Comment not fully
addressed. Screening fences are required to be 6' in height. Revise the site plan to provide
a 6' screening fence for the stormwater pond.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. On sheet C-205, in the "Wood Fence Detail"
the 72" dimension for the height of the fence also states "Storage Area". However, the
screening fence is also to be utilized around the Stormwater Management Area. Either
revise that dimension or make a general note specifying in the detail that it will be
utilized in both areas.
g) Ensure that the landscaping shown in the plan matches that shown in the landscape
schedule. There are more white oaks and Japanese hollies specified in the landscaping
schedule then are shown in the plan. Update the calculations in the landscape schedule
once the landscaping plan is revised. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. However, update the
schedule and calculations in order to address the comments requested.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
i) REV.1: [NEW COMMENT] Revise the landscaping plan to provide at least 2 1/2 inch caliper
trees along the roads. Since this parcel is in the Entrance Corridor (EC) landscaping
requirement must meet the EC minimums.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
j) REV.1: [NEW COMMENT] Landscaping of parking areas within the Entrance Corridor
requires large trees that are 2'/ inches in caliper at planting. Revise the landscaping plan to
show 2'/2 inch caliper large shade trees for trees that are to meet the parking lot tree
requirements.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
k) REV.1: [NEW COMMENT] Revise the Landscape Schedule to correct the typographical error
in plan name. "iles crenata" should be "ilex crenata".
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
1) REV.2: fNEW COMMENTI Revise the Landscape plan to show the shrubs that were part
of the previously approved site plan and are to remain. It appears that there are
shrubs along the side of the existing building that are shown in that site plan and have
not been included in this site plan.
35. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site
Plan approval. Proposed grades are shown to the edge of the property and the new drainage pipe for
off -site stormwater is located 3' off of the property line. The Albemarle County Design Standard
Manual, on page 22 (8.c.) states when off -site easements are required. Rev. 1: Comment not yet
fully addressed. It is recommended with the proposed grading extending to the property line and 1'
high modified CG-2 being proposed within two feet of the property that off -site easement be acquired.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet addressed. It is recommended with the proposed grading extending
to the property line and 1' high modified CG-2 being proposed within two feet of the property
that off -site easement be acquired.
Page 5 of 6
36. [Comment] The major site plan amendment will not be approved until the WPO plan is submitted and
approved. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The major site plan amendment will not be
approved until the WPO plan is approved.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. See engineering comments. The major site plan
amendment will not be approved until the WPO plan is approved.
38. [Comment] The major site plan amendment will not be approved until Engineering, Inspections,
E911, VDH, ARB, ACSA, VDOT, Fire Rescue and Zoning grant their approval. See the attached
comments for these reviewers. Any outstanding review comments will be forwarded to you when
they have been received. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See the attached comments from
the reviewers.
Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. See the attached comments from the reviewers.
40. [NEW COMMENT: 32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(I) & 32.6.2(g)] UPDATE: Show the sewer easement for the
sewer line just north of the north property line. A portion of that easement is within the subject parcel.
Ensure that any items not allowed within a utility easement are not within the easement's area. Rev.
1: Comment not fully addressed. Deedbook 425 page 143 appears to show a 10' wide easement
centered on the existing sewer line, which is a smaller easement than usual. However, the sewer line
seems to be less than 5' from the property line. If this is correct then the sewer line easement should
be shown in the site plan because it would extend slightly into the property. Either show this
easement or provide information on why it is not actually within the property.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. Although the easement lines have been revised,
internal to the site, to show only at 10' wide sewer easement the label has not yet been
updated and still specifies a 20' wide existing sewer easement. Update the label.
44. REV.1: [NEW COMMENT] Provide information on the height of the retaining wall on the edge of the
stormwater pond. Also, provide permanent safety railing along the sides of the stormwater pond
where the screening fence is not proposed. The combination of screening fence and safety railing
should encircle the whole stormwater pond.
Rev. 2: Comment sufficiently addressed. The screening fence is now shown on all sides of
the stormwater management area and the retaining wall detail shows a handrailing at the top
of the wall.
Staff has provided references to provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. The
Code is kept up to date by the County Attorney's office. The Code may found on the County Attorney's
website which may be found under "Departments and Services" at Albemarle.org.
In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.3.5 of Chapter 18 of the Code if the developer fails to submit
a revised major site plan amendment to address all of the requirements within six (6) months after the
date of this letter the application shall be deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn by the developer.
If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me.
Sincerel
y� /
Paty/Satern
Senior Plan er
Planning Division
434-296-5832 ext.3250
psaternye(a-)-albemarle.org
CC: Greenbrier East, LLC
Page 6 of 6
VIRGlN1P
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Patricia Saternye
From: Emily Cox
Date: 02 Oct 2018
Subject: Daly's Rent All (SDP201600058)
The major site plan amendment for Daly's Rent All has been reviewed by Engineering. The following
comments will need to be addressed before approval:
1. WPO Plan must be submitted and approved before final site plan can be approved.
2. Please ensure the professional seal is signed and dated.
3. Topography should at least be visually field verified within in the last year.
4. Provide top and bottom elevations of the retaining wall.
5. Ensure deed book and page are shown for all existing easements (Right-of-way, sanitary, etc).
6. Label the easement around the stormwater facility as, "SWM facility easement".
7. Ensure there is adequate travelway in front of the loading area (show dimension).
8. Parking areas shall not exceed 5% grade anywhere in any direction. Southern parking area exceeds
this slope.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
MEMORANDUM
TO: Paty Saternye
FROM: Margaret Maliszewski
RE: SDP-2016-58 Daly's Rent All
DATE: September 26, 2018
I have reviewed the plan with revision date of 9/13/18 and have the following comments:
This site falls within the Rt. 29 Entrance Corridor and the proposed building is expected to have
a minimal degree of visibility from the corridor. Because the new building will be located behind
a building that fronts on the corridor, the proposal is eligible for staff -level ARB review. Please
submit an ARB application for a County -wide Certificate of Appropriateness (check the box for
"Structures located behind...") and provide the items listed in the corresponding checklist.
Applications and checklists can be found at www.albemarle.org/arb. Approval of the County-
wide Certificate of Appropriateness, including both site and architectural changes, is
required prior to approval of the final site plan. Note that building and roof color will be an
important consideration in the review.
Note the following items regarding the site plan.
1. Visibility of all equipment from Rt. 29 must be eliminated.
a. A note on C201 within the footprint of the proposed building states that equipment shall
be screened to prevent visibility form Rt. 20, and equipment is illustrated behind the
proposed building. No screening details have been provided. If rooftop equipment is
proposed, the design of the screening will be extremely important. Screening must have an
integrated appearance with the building.
b. Revise the equipment screening note to read: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from
the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated."
2. To meet Entrance Corridor requirements, light levels should not exceed 20 fc. Please revise the
plan accordingly.
The applicant is encouraged to submit the ARB application referenced above as soon as
possible to avoid delays in site plan and building permit approval.
Review Comments for SDP201600058 Major Amendment 1-1
Project Name: Daly's Rent All - Major
Date Completed: Tuesday, September 25, 2fl18 DepartmentQvisiordAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer:
Richard Nelson ACSA Requested Changes El
a 1.5-inch water
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed ❑n: 11al2512018
Stephen C. Brich, P.B.
Commissioner
COMMONWEALTH of 'VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange F1oad
Culpeper Virgin 22701
October 03, 2018
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Paty Saternye
Re: Daly's Rent All- Major Site Plan Amendment
SDP-2016-00058
Review #3
Dear Ms. Saternye:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced request dated December 01, 2016, revised September
13, 2018 and offers the following comments:
Land Use
1. Prior to approval VSMP plans must be submitted for review.
Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further
information is desired, please contact Willis C. Bedsaul at 434-422-9866.
A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The
owner/developer must contact the VDOT Charlottesville Residency Land Use Section at (434)
422-9399 for information pertaining to this process
Sincerely, I
u-44- q
Adam J. M ore, 1F.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Review Comments for SDP2O1600058 Major Amendment 1-1
Project Name: Daly's Rent All - Major
Date Completed: Sunday, September 23, 2018 aepartmentQvisionlAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Shawn Maddox Fire Rescue No Objection El
Thank you for addressing the previous comments_ Fire Rescue has no objections_ SNM
.A
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed On: 11al2512018