HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800003 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2018-11-09Phone 434-296-5832
ALg��9�
k.r r
�'IRGSNlP`
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp (Justin(a-)shimp-engineering.com)
From: Paty Saternye, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: March 12, 2018
Rev. 1: July 2, 2018
Rev. 2: November 9, 2018
Subiect: SDP 201800003 Hansen Road Church — Final Site Plan
Fax 434-972-4126
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been
identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.):
[Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
Initial Site Plan Comments (from conditional approval letter dated 6/1/17):
IMPORTANT NOTE: These planning comments (Rev. 2) are not based on the resubmittal documents
submitted on 9126118 (SDP) and 101412018 (ARB) but on the updated version sent to ARB for review on 1117118
(SDP) and 10122118 (ARB). Planning and the most recent ARB review (1115118 approval) have been done
based on these updated documents. Other reviewers based their review on the 9126118 (Site Plan revision date
9126118) resubmission documents and will need to approve any changes that were made.
1. A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. See comments below.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. See comments below.
2. A site plan meeting all the requirements of ZMA1998-20 & ZMA2002-8.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. See comments below.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. See comments below.
3. [ZMA 2002-8 Modification B] Reduce the square footage of office space to below that specified in
ZMA2002-8. The portion of the Application Plan for ZMA1998-20 located generally east of Hansen Road,
and comprised of the area designated at "Office Space #5 — 45,0000 SQ FT", was amended with ZMA2002-
8 to reduce the permitted square footage of office space to 20,000 square feet. This plan shows the square
footage of office uses at either of 34,000 or 35,840 square feet, both of which do not meet the ZMA proffer
limitation.
UPDATED: ZMA2002-8 showed on the revised application plan "Office Space #5 — 20,0000 SQ FT".
20,000 SQ FT is the maximum total square footage allowed on the site of any use based on that rezoning,
including unfinished basements. Reduce the proposed total square footage of uses to 20,000 or less. Any
square footage above 20,000 will require an amendment to the rezoning and a new initial site plan. The
amendment to the rezoning would have to be approved prior to the new initial site plan being approved.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. Although the "Proposed Use" on the coversheet, and the building
labels on the other sheets, specify a GFA of 19,180 square feet there are dashed lines both within the
building and on the exterior of the north corner of the building that are not labeled as to what they represent.
It appears that a future expansion of the building that is not specified in the provided notes and labels is
shown and would increase the square footage of the building beyond the allowed 20,000 square feet of use.
Page 1 of 4
Either remove these dashed lines or specify what they represent and ensure that they do not represent any
additional building area that would bring the total area within the building to over the allowed 20,000 square
feet.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. The response to the comment only addressed the terrace and
not the dashed line on the inside of the building, which may represent a mezzanine. Ensure that all square
footage of the building is include in the proposed use information on the coversheet and that the total is not
above 20,000 square feet, which is the limit set by the ZMA. With two or more stories at 11,402 square feet
the building would be above 20,000 square feet.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Revise the gross square feet of proposed building on the
cover sheet to be 19,680 as specified in an email from Shimp Engineering on 10/22/18.
4. UPDATE: [NEW COMMENT] An early grading plan cannot be approved until the requirements of proffer #1
of ZMA-98-20 Pantops PD-MC have been met.
FINAL: Comment not addressed. See comments below in reference to the proffers.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. No response included in the comment response letter. An early
grading plan cannot be approved until the requirements of proffer #1 of ZMA-98-20 Pantops PD-MC have
been met.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Proffer #1 will be met with the approval of the Landscape
Plan, which is part of this site plan. What has been shown on the updated version of the site plan
(revision date 10/22/18) meets these reauirements.
6. [ZMA 1998-20 Requirement 3] All buildings shall be designed to provide rooftop style, treatment and color
schemes which assure minimal visual impact on the Monticello viewshed. Assurance of such style,
treatment and color scheme shall be a condition of final site plan approval. Such approval may be given by
the Director of Planning and Community Development after providing notice to the Thomas Jefferson
Memorial Foundation and an opportunity for Foundation comments to be considered.
FINAL: Comment not addressed. Address the following:
b) The submission packet as submitted to the County does not contain all of the information they will need
for review. Any architectural plan, graphics, materials and colors submitted to the Thomas Jefferson
Foundation (TJF) should also be submitted to the County for review.
Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. No architectural plan, graphics, materials and colors have been
submitted to the County for review.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Ensure that the architectural floor plans and
elevations are submitted with the next resubmission of the site plan. Because of they are
required to meet the proffers they must be officially part of the final site plan packet for approval.
8. [ZMA 1998-20 Requirement 4] Provide a highlighted copy of the Four Party Road Improvement
Agreement dated 10/20/1998. Ensure that the highlights point out any reference to the subject parcel and
the responsibilities of its owners for private road improvements. Include the deed book and page number
for this agreement in a note on the site plan.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. The Four Party Road Improvement Agreement was submitted and
evaluated. This agreement does not appear to cover maintenance of the roads and does not cover adding
landscaping, islands for landscaping, or parking to the roads. Therefore it appears that this agreement does
not provide sufficient rights for all improvements to the roads currently being shown in the site plan. Address
the following:
d) Note that any new easement will need to be reviewed as a separate submission and that all deeds
associated with those easement should be submitted with them for review.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. An easement plat has been submitted and is under review.
However, it does not show the proposed landscaping easements and it also does not show easements for
all of the utility improvements shown on this site plan. Ensure that on the next submission the site plan and
the easement plat both show all required easements.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Easement plat is still under review. First draft of deed of
easement for stormwater drainage to the signed by Rivanna Ridge, LLC was submitted on 11/8/18.
Address the following:
a) Site plan will not be approved until the easement plat is approved, signed/notarized, recorded
and the deed book and page number of the recordation included in this site plan.
b) Once the easement plat is approved ensure any changes to the easement plat are incorporated
in this site plan prior to resubmission.
Page 2 of 4
32. [32.5.2(i)] Provide the width of all proposed parking travel and access ways.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following:
a) The width of the travel ways at the two drop off areas do not appear to meet minimum requirements.
Revise these accessways to meet minimum requirements.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet addressed. The drive aisle at the front of the building, where there are
perpendicular parking spaces, is only 20' wide and appears to have two way traffic. However, the
parking spaces in that area are not wide enough to allow the 20' drive aisle. Either widen the
parking spaces or widen the drive aisle in order to meet the minimum requirement.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Do ONE of the following:
L Increase the width of the one handicapped parking space on the right (at the front
door and closest to the drop off area) to be 10', since it is impacted by the 20' wide
drive aisle. If this option is chosen ensure the width of that one handicapped parking
space is dimension in order to show that it is not the typical handicapped parking
space width.
ii. Increase the width of the drive aisle to be 24', so that the 8' wide handicapped
parking space will be allowed along it.
iii. Officially request, and be granted, a waiver of the drive aisle minimum width (4.12.16
(c)(1)). If you wish, in the justification for the waiver, you maV provide the
documentation specified in the comment response letter. That response stated, "The
perpendicular spaces in the front of the building are all handicapped accessible
spaces. The width of their travel way is defined by the ADA code, not the County.
They are in compliance with the ADA code." This request would have to be granted
prior to site plan approval.
d) Add the width of all travel areas including every portion of the access ways. There are no widths
provided at the two entrances, connecting portions between multiple parking areas, or within two of
the parking areas. Also, it appears that the width of the travel area, where there are 33 parking
spaces, may be below required standards.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. Add the width of all travel areas including every portion of
the access ways.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Dimension the MINIMUM width, not the maximum
width, of the drive aisle near the front entrance and along which three handicapped spaces
are located. The minimum drive aisle width is what must be shown and approved. The
dimension added was the maximum area, where the pull off area is, and not the pinch point
next to the handicapped spaces. This "minimum" width meeting the County Code is what is
being reviewed and is therefore what is required to be shown.
37. [32.5.2(k)] There is a proposed storm pipe that carries off site stormwater but easement is shown for the
proposed pipe. Show the proposed easement. A plat for the proposed drainage easement, and the
vacation of what appears to be the existing easement, must be approved and recorded prior to final site plan
approval.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. A plat for the proposed drainage easement, and the vacation of the
existing easement, must be approved by the County, signed, notarized and recorded prior to final site plan
approval.
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. A plat for the proposed drainage easement, and the vacation of the
existing easement, has been submitted for review. This easement plat must be approved by the County,
signed, notarized and recorded prior to final site plan approval.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. A plat for the proposed drainage easement, and the
vacation of the existing easement, is under review. This easement plat must be approved by the
County, signed, notarized and recorded prior to final site plan approval.
Page 3 of 4
41. [32.5.2(n)] Provide:
e) The location of trash containers.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following:
iii. Ensure that the dumpster pad meet the minimum size beyond the front of the dumpster.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. No dumpster pad appears to have been shown on the
site plan even though a dumpster screening detail has been provided. Show the dumpster pad,
dimension the dumpster pad and ensure it meets the minimum requirements.
Rev. 2: Comment not yet fully addressed. Ensure that the size of the dumpster pad
matched the dimensions specified. The dimension states 10' width. The area appears to
be 9' wide. Ensure that these match and meet minimum standards.
46. [Comment] See the attached comments from the other SRC reviewers.
FINAL: Comment not fully addressed. See the attached comments from the other SRC reviewers.
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See the attached comments from the other SRC reviewers.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. See the attached comments from the other SRC reviewers.
Additional comments for Final Site Plan:
55. [New Comment] Submit all easement plat(s) required for this site plan as a separate submission. Submit
for those easements all required deeds and legal documents. This site plan will not be approved until those
easements and deeds have been approved by the County, the easement plat has been signed, notarized,
recorded, and a copy of the recorded easement plats and deeds are provided to the reviewer of this site
plan.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. An easement plat has been submitted and is under review.
However, it does not contain all of the proposed easements shown on this site plan, there are utility lines on
this site plan that do not have corresponding easements on the submitted plat, and the proposed legal
documents associated with the easement plat have not yet been submitted. This site plan will not be
approved until all required easement plats and deeds have been approved by the County, the easement plat
has been signed, notarized, recorded, and a copy of the recorded easement plats and deeds are provided
to the reviewer of this site plan.
Rev. 2: Comment not vet fully addressed. This site plan will not be approved until all required
easement plats and deeds have been approved by the County, the easement plat has been signed,
notarized, recorded, and a copy of the recorded easement plats and deeds are provided to the
reviewer of this site plan.
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" 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 final site plan 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.
Please contact Paty Saternye in the Planning Division by using psaternye(a-)albemarle.org or 434-296-5832 ext.
3250 for further information.
Page 4 of 4
�� pF ALF}�tY
� IRCI'`�tP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Patty Saternye
From: Francis MacCall
Division: Zoning
Date: 11 /9/2018
Subject: SDP2018-00003 Hansen Road Church Final —zoning comments
Please omit any comment that you have believe has already been made with your comments.
1/25/2018
Religieus Assembly Use. ,
•_
6/28/2018
..OPO■ USE" as fellews;
11 /9/2018
1. 1 believe that I have incorrectly required the parking requirement for religious assembly uses
on this site. Instead of the religious assembly uses parking calculation of 1 space per 3 fixed
seats that has been used, the parking calculation for shopping centers should have been used
since this site is part of a ZMA that approved the use of the shopping center parking
calculation. The calculation of 5.5 spaces per every 1000sgft of gross floor area has been
used throughout most of the development approved with the 1998 and 2002 ZMAs. The
shopping center calculation would show the building of 19960/1000 = 19.96 X 5.5 = 110
spaces required and 206 provided. The 206 spaces provided would exceed the maximum
allowed for the site. The maximum permitted would be 132 spaces. (110 * .20 = 22 +110 =
132). In the interest of moving forward with this site plan, using the standard religious
assembly uses parking requirements for this plan will be permitted at this time. So, having the
188 spaces for the 563 seats noted on the plan is allowed. PLEASE SEE COMMENT #2 for
future parking calculation requirements.
2. Please note the following for any proposed development beyond any approval of
SDP2018-00003 in the future.
The architectural drawings used to verify that the structure would be at or near the 20,000sgft
limit set by the 2002 ZMA show the church to have 845 seats, 555 in the main area and 290 in
a mezzanine area. The site also currently has a Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA2018-00002)
proposal to change the square footage limit for buildings on this block per the 2002 ZMA. The
mezzanine area appears to be contemplated if the 20,000sgft building size limit is increased
per an approved amendment to the 2002 ZMA. If the increase in building size is permitted and
the church builds 845 seats, then any approved site plan would need to be amended. With
this amendment the 5.5 spaces per 1000 gross floor area must be used for calculating
parking. It is known per the plan for ZMA2018-00002 that the church building is proposed to
be 30,000sgft gross. Per the shopping center calculation of 5.5 spaces per 1000sgft of gross
floor area this would require 165 spaces. The plan also includes a 2-story office building of
25,000sgft total that would require 138 spaces, combined 165 + 138 = 303 parking spaces.
The current site plan shows that there would be only 206 spaces provided, short 97 spaces if
built as shown on SDP2018-00003. At the time of site plan amendment, the will be required to
show that an approved alternative has been provided. Shared parking with an adjacent
property appears to be the most viable option. Any shred parking option would eventually
need a recorded agreement between property owners.
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:
Patricia Saternye
From:
Emily Cox
Date:
07 Feb 2018
Rev 1:
04 June 2018
Rev. 2:
12 Oct 2018
Subject:
Hansen Road Church — Final Site Development Plan (SDP201800003)
The final site development plan for Hansen Road Church 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. Rev. 1:
Comment still valid. Rev. 2: Comment still valid. Rev. 3: Comment still valid.
2. Please ensure the professional seal is signed and dated. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
3. Provide details for the proposed retaining walls. Rev. 1: Comment still valid. Rev. 2:
Comment addressed.
4. Provide drainage easements for all pipes carrying water offsite. Easements will need to be
recorded before plan can be approved. Rev. 1: Comment still valid — Plat is under review.
Rev. 2: Deed must be provided with drainage easement plat.
5. Parallel parking spaces should be 9'x20', not 8'x20'. (County Code Chapter 18- 4.12.16) Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
6. Show pavement markings required throughout the site (stop bars, one-way at the drop-off area,
etc.) Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
7. Provide a road section detail. Pavement sections were provided, but not road sections. Rev. 1:
Road cross section not provided. Pavement section detail was provided. Rev. 2: Comment
addressed.
8. Ensure proposed tree protection locations are shown on the demolition sheet. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
9. 2:1 Slopes should be avoided wherever possible. The landscape plan does properly specify the
required ground cover, but please ensure the WPO Plan also specifies this. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
10. Please show the acreage and c-factors for each drainage area on sheet C-11. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
11. Where is Ex. DI-7? The note on Sheet C-I I says concrete flume to Ex. DI-7, but it is not labeled.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
12. Velocity in storm drains should be kept below 10 ft/s if possible.( Per the VDOT drainage manual,
section 9.4.8.7, velocities in excess of 1 Oft/s should be avoided) Rev. 1: Provide specification or
recommendation showing that pipes/system can handle such excess velocity. Rev. 2:
Comment addressed.
13. Trees should not be above storm pipes or in easements. When necessary, move trees at least
5ft from the center of the utility. If not possible, move trees as far from utility as feasible.
Review Comments for SDP201800003 Final Site Development Plan LJ
Project Name: HANSEN ROAD CHURCH - FINAL
Date Completed: Thursday, November DS, DepartmenVDivisiordAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer:[
Richard Nelson LJ ACSA - Requested Changes
0-ice I have the
Page: 1 County of Albemarle
Printed On: 11110812018
Review Comments for ARB201800097 Final Plat 1-1
Project Name: Hansen Road Church - Final
Date Completed: Monday, November D5, 20 DepartmentQvisionlAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Margaret Maliszewski - Coo ARB - Approves El
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed On: 11109/2018
Review Comments for SDP201800003 Final Site Development Plan LJ
Project Name: HANSEN ROAD CHURCH - FINAL
Date Completed: Wednesday, October 03, DepartmenVDiuisiorVAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Margaret Maliszewski
F] CDD ARB Requested Changes
Site plan with revision date of 9/26/2018: The following conditions ofARB approval remain outstanding:
1. Provide a sample of the metal panel for review.
2. Revise the lighting plan to include all external wall -mounted lights and any ground -mounted lights intended to illuminate the
building_
3. Confirm that the pipe on the north side of Rolkin Road is sufficiently deep to allow for the planting of trees above.
Please provide:
1. One full set of revised drawings addressing each of these conditions_ Include updated revision dates on each drawing.
2. A memo including detailed responses indicating how each condition has been satisfied. If changes other than those
requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also_ Highlighting the changes in the drawing with 'clouding'
or by other means will facilitate review and approval_
3. A 'Revised Application Submittal" farm to ensure proper tracking and distribution.
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed On: 11/0712018