Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800071 Action Letter 2018-11-20GfRGSIytP County of Albemarle Department of Community Development November 20, 2018 Dustin Greene Roudabush 172 South Pantops Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 RE: SDP201800071 Timberwood Square — Initial Site Plan Mr. Greene: The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative conditional approval to the above referenced site plan. The approval shall be valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of this letter, provided that the developer submits a final site plan for all or a portion of the site within one (1) year after the date of this letter as provided in section 32.4.3.1 of Chapter 19 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and thereafter diligently pursues approval of the final site plan. In accordance with Chapter 18 Section 32.4.2. 8 Early or Mass Grading may be permitted after the following approvals are received: 1. Engineering approval of a VSMP plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. 2. Approval of all easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control. 3. Submittal of a tree conservation checklist with areas for tree preservation identified. The final site plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the following items are received: 1. A final site plan that satisfies all of the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code. 2. A fee of $1,613 for the final site plan application. 3. A fee of $215 for mailing and preparing notices for the initial site plan, as this fee has not yet been paid. [Addressed after letter sent] Please submit 8 copies of the final plans to the Community Development Department. The assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies (for ACSA, please submit 3 copies of construction plans directly to them, as stated in their comments). Once you receive the first set of comments on the final site plan, please work with each reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements. The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature until tentative approvals for the attached conditions from the following agencies/ reviewers have been obtained: 1. Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer)- 2 copies [John Anderson; j anderson2 galbemarle. org] 2. Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner)- 3 copies [Tori Kanellopoulos; vkanellop oulo s (& albemarle. org] 3. Albemarle County Inspections Services (Inspections)- 1 copy [Michael Dellinger; mdellingerO) albemarle. org] 4. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue- 1 copy [Shawn Maddox; smaddox(k albemarle. org] 5. Albemarle County Service Authority- See comments for number of copies to ACSA [Jeremy Lynn; jlynn(&serviceauthority.org] 6. Virginia Department of Transportation- 1 copy [Adam Moore; adam.moore(kvdot.vir ig nia.gov] If you have any questions about these conditions or the submittal requirements, please feel free to contact me at 434-296-5832 ext. 3270 or vkanellopouloskalbemarle.org. Sincerely, Tori Kanellopoulos Planner GfRGSIytP County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Dustin Greene From: Tori Kanellopoulos - Planner Division: Planning Services Date: November 6, 2018 Subject: SDP201800071- Timberwood Square - Initial Site Plan The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department Community Development will recommend approve 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.] Initial Site Plan Comments Required Prior to Initial Site Plan Approval: [18-32.3.4] Fees. The required mailing notice fee must be paid prior to initial site plan approval. [Addressed after letter sent] Required Prior to Final Site Plan Approval: Planning Comments: 1. See attached direction from the Post Master regarding group mailboxes. Please coordinate location with the Post Master. 2. [18-32.5.2.a] Zoning. Include the minimum lot size for standard R-15 development, which is 2,904 square feet on SP2. 3. [18-32.5.2.a] Zoning. Maximum building height: List the maximum building height for the office use and for the residential uses (Townhomes) separately on SP2. See 18-4.19 and 18-4.20 for building height requirements. 4. [18-32.5.2.a] Zoning. Add the Airport Impact Area overlay to Notes for Zoning on SP2. 5. [Comment] Remove the reference to "approved residential density"; there is only "proposed residential density" at this stage. The proposed density is within the R-15 density requirements. 6. [18-32.5.2.b] Written schedules or data. Revise note to read "office use" instead of "commercial use", for Parking Tabulations and Square Footage, as the office use has specific parking requirements that are distinct from other commercial uses, on SP2. 7. [18-32.5.2.b] Written schedules or data. According to GIS, the proposed tabulations (acreage for each lot) are actually the existing tabulations (SP2). 8. [18-32.5.2.a] Setback lines and yards. Revise Setback Note on SP2 and remove the reference to Townhomes. Refer to 18-4.19 for non -infill setback requirements and use those requirements. 9. [18-32.5.2.n] Existing and proposed improvements. Include the proposed paving materials for the trail and for the parking areas. 10. [18-32.5.2.d] In the development areas, the critical slopes ordinance has been revised to create an overlay map of 'managed' and' preserved' steep slopes. Please remove all reference to "critical slopes" (SP2). 11. [18-32.5.2.m] Ingress and egress. The location of existing and proposed ingress to and egress from the property, showing the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection. 12. [18-32.5.2.1] Existing and proposed utilities. Label all utilities as either existing or proposed. Include the deed book and page number of all existing easements. Proposed easements that are not yet recorded must be recorded with an easement plat prior to final site plan approval. 13. [18-32.5.2.1 and 18-4.11.41 Existing and proposed utilities. Revise the easements that are conflicting with any structures. See Lot 10 as an example (appears easement conflicting with deck). 14. [18-4.12.6] Minimum number of parking spaces. Include the number of bedrooms for the Townhomes in order to ensure that parking has been calculated correctly on SP2. 15. [18-4.12.6] Minimum number of parking spaces. Add maximum number of employees for the office use to SP2. 16. [18-4.12.6] Minimum number of parking spaces. Include a copy of the previously approved parking waiver, such as a letter or an email. 17. [18-4.12.13] Dumpster pad placement. The location of the dumpster pad appears to be interfering with two parking spaces. Revise the placement of the dumpster pad. 18. [18-4.12.4(b)] ADA accessible spaces. Label the van -accessible ADA spaces as "van'. 19. [18-4.12.5] Location of parking areas. Parking is required to be on the same lot as the primary use, except as authorized by 18-4.12.8. The lot lines for all of the lots overlap with the parking spaces in such a way that the parking spaces are split by the lot lines. Some lots contain one full parking space and one or two parts of other parking spaces, however only some lots (1, 2, 6, 10, 11, 15, 19, 20, 28 and 32) contain at least two full parking spaces. A shared parking agreement will be required for the lots for the townhomes. 20. [18-4.12.16(c)] Parking space widths. A parking space between Lots 7 and 8 appears to be 8.5', and four parking spaces in front of Lot 10 appear to be 9.5' wide. Revise to meet the 9' width requirement. The two end parking spaces in the row of spaces in front of Lots 25-32 also do not appear to be sufficiently wide. They appear to be 7' and 8' wide, which is below the 9' width requirement. 21. [18-4.12] Parking. Include `No Parking Signs' along Lois Lane. 22. [18-4.12.8(e)] Instrument assuring continuation of off-site parking. Stand-alone parking for the commercial area: If stand-alone parking or off-site shared parking is to be provided, the applicant shall submit with the application for a site plan, site plan waiver or, if a site plan is not required, with an application for a zoning compliance clearance, an instrument that restricts the use of that part of the land on which parking is provided to that use, and assures that a minimum number of parking spaces as required by this section shall be established and maintained for the life of the use. The instrument shall be in a form that is suitable for recording, shall be subject to review and approval as to form and substance by the county attorney, and shall be recorded in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county before the site plan or site plan waiver is approved. As the parking requirements for the use or structure change, subsequent instruments may be submitted, reviewed, approved and recorded that rescind or modify the prior instrument. a. This is a requirement prior to final site plan approval. 23. [18-4.12.11(b)] Identification of use served. For standalone parking, at least one (1) sign shall be posted in the parking area identifying the off-site use served by the parking area. 24. [18-32.7.9.4] Contents of a landscape plan. Revise the small notes counting the number of trees on SP9 and SP 10, as some are incorrect. 25. [18-32.7.9.4] Contents of a landscape plan. IG (Illex Glabra) appears to be Inkberry, not Winterberry as indicated in the Commercial Landscaping Tabulations on SP 11. 26. [18-32.7.9.4(b)(1)] Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. Show the limits of clearing, location and type of protective fencing, grade changes requiring tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond limits of clearing for preserved existing trees. This could be shown on the demolition plan or the landscaping plan. 27. [18-32.7.9.5(d)] Landscaping along streets. Street trees are required for private and public streets. 1 large street tree is required every 50' of frontage, or 1 medium shade tree every 40' of frontage. Sections of the private streets do not appear to meet this requirement. See Code for full requirements. 28. [18-32.7.9.7(e)] Screening. Include the height of the proposed screening fences. Note that the minimum height is 6'. 29. [18-32.7.9.7(a)(4)] Double frontage lots. Double frontage lots need to be sufficiently screened from the public ROW. Lot 11 does not appear to be sufficiently screened from Worth Crossing. 30. [18-32.7.9.7(a)(2)] Parking areas. Parking areas need to be screened from adjacent residential districts. The parking for Lots 11-14 does not appear to be sufficiently screened from the adjacent property. Show if existing trees/landscaping will be preserved to provide screening. 31. [18-32.7.9.8(b)] Tree canopy. In order to count toward the tree canopy requirement, plants/trees must exceed 5' in height at a maturity of 10 years after planting. Some of the landscaping shown on SP 11 is 5' or less at maturity, and therefore does not count toward this requirement. The residential tree canopy calculations appear to now be below the requirement. Please revise to meet the requirement. 32. [18-4.16.1(3)] Minimum area. Note that groundcover shall consist of turf grass or contained mulch such as pine bark, shredded tires, or pea gravel for recreational areas. 33. [18-4.16.1(3)] Minimum area. Indicate how the recreational area is being calculated. In the residential area, there appears to be 2,525 sq. ft. for the tot lot, 25,289 sq. ft. for one section of open space and 4,692 sq. ft. for the other section of open space. The recreational area is listed as 17,376 sq. ft. 34. [18-4.16.2.1] Recreational minimum facilities. Note that the swing is required to have four (4) seats. The image shown on SP 11 only has three seats. 35. [18-4.16.2.1] Recreational minimum facilities. The proposed tot lot must be fenced, as it is adjacent to a street and to private backyards. 36. [18-4.17] Outdoor lighting. Resubmit the lighting information so that it is legible. It is not possible to read the information on the types of lights provided on SP 12 and SP 13. 37. [18-4.17.4] Standards. Any outdoor luminaire that emits 3,000 or more lumens must be a full cutoff luminaire. Therefore, both the Mediterranean light and the KVF2 light must be full cutoff, or a different type of luminaire must be chosen that is less than 3,000 lumens. The Mediterranean light is not full cutoff and does not comply. The KVF2 light has a light bulb that hangs down, and therefore may not be full cutoff. 38. [18-32.7.2.3] Sidewalks. Sidewalks or trails must be provided on both sides of Lois Lane. The trail on the East side may serve as pedestrian connectivity. A sidewalk is needed on the West side and must connect to the other sidewalks shown. 39. [18-32.7.2.3] Sidewalks. Provide a sidewalk or other pedestrian access across the curb/planting strip (if this is ultimately kept) between Lots 1 and 15, so that pedestrians may have safe access to the other side of the development and the office uses. 40. [18-32.7.2.3] Sidewalks. Provide a sidewalk on the north side of the existing Private Road to connect with the existing sidewalk and the proposed residential area. 41. [18-32.7.2.3] Sidewalks. Request for applicant to provide sidewalks along Timberwood Blvd. and Worth Crossing along the edge of the property. Provide ADA accessible ramps at the corner of Timberwood Blvd and Worth Crossing, and at the trailhead where it meets Worth Crossing. The sidewalks in the public ROW will need to be dedicated to the County and maintained by VDOT. Additional detail pending VDOT's comments. 42. [Comment] Additional clarification is needed for the curb and planting strip that restricts vehicle access between Lots 1 and 15. It appears to still contain curb and gutter, which would no longer be needed. Additional details are needed to determine what the use and structure of this section is. Fire/Rescue has comments as well, as there are more than 30 lots with only one point of access, and this section may need to be changed. 43. [Comment] Include one sheet that shows an overall detailed layout of the proposed site design. All of the detailed pages are split into two pages. This is helpful for measuring and level of detail, however there should also be one sheet showing the entire site. 44. [Future Application Comments] a. [Comment]: Private maintenance agreement will be required for the open space and common/recreational areas. Shared parking agreements will be required for the townhomes. An instrument to assure continuation of off-site parking will be required for the commercial area. A private maintenance agreement or dedication to public use will be needed for the trail. b. [Comment]: Note that Subdivision plat will be needed to create lots for the Townhomes. c. [Comment]: The proposed private streets will need to meet the private streets standards in Chapter 14 (Subdivision Ordinance) during the subdivision phase of this development. d. [Comment]: Easement plats will be required for all proposed easements prior to final site plan approval. Additional landscaping easements will be required for any landscaping shown on residential lots. e. [Comment]: Note that approved Road Plans, WPO and VSMP are required prior to final site plan approval. Engineering Comments 1. Note: Combined (Engineering) Road Plan (SUB201500077) and Final Site Plan review comments (SDP201500023) were sent to Applicant on 6/18/16 (Timberwood Square). 2. Final Site, Road, WPO Plans for this proposed development did not reach point of approval. SDP201500023 (FSP) expired due to inactivity. a. Text of email sent to Applicant (8/31/2018 10:03 AM), reads, in part: "...this application was withdrawn in January due to inactivity in accordance with 32.4.3.5(b). In addition, your initial has expired since it was approved in 2011 and that is only valid for 5 years. So, you will need to submit an initial site plan and fee and start your application again." b. Text, email, Engineering to Planning (6/18/2016 2:11 PM -also RMS docs, SDP201500023): "(SDP201500023) —Engineering has No Objection to FSP design. Engineering comments addressed with this or prior submittal. FSP Approval requires ROAD Plan Approval, and requires that roads (Lois Lane, Landon Lane) be built or bonded. ROAD Plan is not approved. FSP Approval requires that WPO be approved and bonded. Planning coordinator should confirm that SWM Maintenance Agreements have been signed, that project has received VPDES Permit coverage letter from DEQ. Please confirm WPO status with Max Greene, Engineering Div." 3. Current SDP201800071, Initial Site Development Plan for Timberwood Square, maybe identical with SDP201500023. Engineering requests cloud revisions for any design change made to SDP201500023 (since basis of SDP201800071) since Final Site Plan set dated 8 Jun 2016 (2nd Revision). If no changes, please respond 'SDP201500023 is identical with SDP201800071'. 4. Ch. 14 Division 5, Procedures for the Approval of Private Streets, Sec. 14-233, When private streets in development areas may be authorized is relevant. It appears no element of initial site plan approval persists, and that request for approval of private streets in the development area is required. 5. Street design standards: Engineering recently met with RGA (10/4/18) to discuss conceptual layout for 770 Rio Road East. VDOT and AASHTO standards apply to street design for six or more lots, and apply to Timberwood Square. If RGA can accept county position that in this particular instance, since a Road Plan CL radius of 110' (Lois Lane) was accepted in 2016, and Road Plan was virtually approved, provided RGA does not reference 110' CL radius in future applications unless supported by VDOT /AASHTO standards, then Engineering will not reverse and require what would amount to major redesign of Lois Lane. Options: Indicate understanding of County willingness to approve a 110' CL radius for Lois Lane; identify VDOT /AASHTO reference to 110' CL radius (Engineering is unaware of a CL radius standard this low); redesign Lois Lane to meet VDOT /AASHTO CL radii standards. Engineering welcomes RGA acceptance that if 110' CL radius is less than published applicable VDOT /AASHTO standards, Engineering does not in the future intend to accept 110' (or any measure of) radius that does not meet VDOT /AASHTO minimum design parameters. 6. Submit Road Plan that addresses remaining Road Plan review comments, at earliest convenience. Engineering requests cloud revisions for any design change made to SUB201500077 Road Plan set received 7 Jun 2016 (2nd Revision). If no changes, please state `Road Plan submittal identical with most recent Road Plan for Timberwood Square, SUB201500077.' Again, please show any changes as cloud revisions. 7. Carefully review Engineering Division Road and Site Plan comments dated 18 -Jun 2016. (Also Attached. Also in CV.) 8. Final Site Plan Approval requires Planning Division to authorize private streets in the development area, if private streets are proposed. 9. Final Site Plan Approval requires Road Plan meet VDOT-AASHTO standards, with exception outlined in item 6., above. 10. Final Site Plan Approval requires roads be built or bonded. 11. Final Site Plan Approval requires WPO Approval. Last action on WP0201500032: review comments sent to Applicant, 6/27/16. If Applicant re -submits a WPO plan based on WP0201500032, Engineering requests cloud revisions of any change to plans since last submittal of WP020500032. 12. This Initial Site Plan appears to require an Initial and/or Final Plat. Inspections Comments: 1. Retaining walls greater than 3 feet in height require a separate building permit. Walls exceeding 4 feet in height require a stamped engineered design also. 2. Parking spaces and access isles shall not have a surface slope greater than 1:48. Access isles shall be at the same level as the parking space they serve. Fire/Rescue Comments: 1. A knox box will be required on the new office building. Please add a note indicating such and that location can be coordinated with the fire marshal's office. 2. If any of these buildings will be sprinklered the FDC must be shown on the site plan and located within 100' of a fire hydrant. 3. If the buildi travel widtl- [Addressed] 4. Due to the number of one or two-family dwelling units exceeding 30 there must be a second entrance/exit provided. ACSA 1. Submit 3 copies to ACSA for review ATTN: Jeremy Lynn. VDOT 1. Note that an acceptable Maintenance of Traffic plan must be provided on the Final Site Plan.