HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800089 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2019-06-13County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp, P.E. (justin(&shimp-en ing eering corn); Keane Rucker (keane&shimp-en ing eering com)
From: Andy Reitelbach, Senior Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: June 13, 2019
Subject: SDP2018-00089 — Pantops Corner — Final Site Plan; 2°d Submittal
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department of 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 Pantops Corner Final Site Plan (SDP2018-00089):
1. [General Comment] Please clarify whether the proposed new building area on the cover sheet is the building footprint,
or the square footage of the entire building. The label on the building on sheet C5 indicates that the footprint of the
hotel is 15,394 sq. ft. However, the Land Use Schedule on the cover sheet indicates 4,783 sq. ft. Clarify the
discrepancy. Is one calculation perhaps the footprint of the building, while the other is the overall square footage
of the building?
2. 132.5.21 Please show the dam break inundation zone on all plan sheets so that improvements can be analyzed with regard
to this area. Comment addressed.
3. 132.5.21 Show the Flood Hazard Overlay District on all plan sheets so that improvements can be analyzed with regard to
this area. Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.21 Show the limits of the steep slopes on all plan sheets. In addition, it appears that portions of the grading and tree
removal along the northern and northwestern parts of the property are encroaching on preserved steep slopes. The tree
protection fencing is shown to intrude on preserved steep slopes in several places, including parallel to Stony
Point Road and behind the dumpster enclosures. Revise the location of treeline disturbance so that preserved
steep slopes are not disturbed.
[General Comment; Chapter 14, Subdivision Ordinance] The boundary line adjustment plat (SUB2019-00002)
affecting this property needs to be approved and recorded prior to the approval of this site plan. In addition, an easement
plat will be required for road access, utilities, and drainage. Please show these revised property boundaries on all plan
sheets. In addition, is the temporary grading easement shown on TMP 78-6 existing or proposed? The "new boundary
lines" as shown on the site plan do not match what was approved with SUB2019-00002. The boundary lines need
1
to match what are the existing property lines (as SUB2019-00002 has now been approved and recorded), or
another boundary line adjustment plat will have to be submitted showing the proposed new property lines. The
easement plat (and associated deeds) will still need to be approved prior to the approval of this plan. Why does
the access easement narrow at the intersection with Route 20? It does not appear that this narrowing of the
easement would provide enough space for both a sidewalk and a landscaping strip.
6. [ZMA2013-00002] The proffers in this rezoning require a second northbound lane along Route 20. Please show this
second lane and all associated improvements on the site plan. In addition, road plans for this section of Route 20 will be
needed to demonstrate compliance with VDOT and engineering standards. As the sidewalks along Route 20 will need
to be connected with the new sidewalks to be constructed, include the following note (which already shown along
Route 250): "Connect to existing sidewalk."
7. [4.20] As this hotel is proposed to be five -stories tall, stepbacks will be required. Please note this. Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.21 Please provide the square footage of the hotel on the site plan layout sheet. Also, identify and provide dimensions
for the appurtenances that are on the north and west sides of the hotel building that stick out from what appears to be the
main structure of the hotel, especially the western appurtenance that helps the hotel to meet setback requirements. Clarify
whether the square footage provided is the footprint, as it is labelled, or the overall square footage?
9. [4.12.13] Provide the dimensions of the porte-cochere that is proposed to be used for the loading area. What is the width
and length of the drive aisle underneath the canopy? Also, is the sidewalk proposed to continue underneath the canopy?
Comment addressed.
10. [4.12)] What are the square footages of the parking lots islands? Comment addressed.
11. [General Comment] The labels for both Road A and Road B state that they are 36' wide private rights -of -way. However,
the arrow widths on both streets show the width of the access easement as 37'. Please clarify the widths of these two
rights -of -way. The title for exhibit 2 on sheet C12 states that Travelway B is 36' rather than 37'. Revise this title
on sheet C12.
12. [General Comment] Please indicate on the site plan whether the area along Route 250 is proposed to be dedicated to
VDOT. Where is this revised note shown? I did not see it on the site plan.
13. [32.7.2.3; 32.7.9.51 The sidewalks and street landscaping strips must be within the boundaries of the private road access
easement. Revise the boundaries of the easement to include these areas. In addition, landscaping strips are to be between
the roadway and the sidewalks. Reverse these improvements on the plan. Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.5; Zoning Comment] Provide the heights of the retaining walls on the site layout plan. Also, guardrails are
required along the sidewalks adjacent to the retaining walls. Please show these rails on the site layout plan and provide
their heights. Comment addressed.
15. [32.7.9] On the landscape plan, identify those trees and shrubs that are saved from the existing conditions. Comment
addressed.
16. 132.7.91 The street landscaping must be within the private street right-of-way. Comment addressed.
17. [32.7.9] Provide street landscaping along the frontage of TMP 78-5A. Comment addressed.
2
18. [32.7.91 Provide distances along the street rights -of -way so that staff can accurately analyze the required amount of street
landscaping required. Comment not addressed and still applies.
19. [32.7.9] On the landscape plan, the street tree shown on the west side of Pantops Corner Way at the intersection with
Route 250 is in the sidewalk. Please revise the location. Comment addressed.
20. [32.5.2(k)] Please show the location of all proposed sewer and drainage easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width
measurement. Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.2(1)] Please show the location of all proposed utility easements. Label as "proposed" with a size/width
measurement. Comment addressed.
22. [32.7.21 Are street identification signs proposed? There do not appear to be any shown on the plans at the intersection of
private roads A and B, or at Route 20 and Pantops Corner Way. Comment addressed.
23. [General Comment] Are cross -sections of the proposed private streets A and B proposed? Comment addressed.
Comments from SDP2018-00039 — Pantops Corner Initial Site Plan Action Letter:
The original comments from the review and action letter for SDP2018-00039 are in gray font. Follow-up comments from the
review of the final site plan, SDP2018-00089, are in bolded black font. Please address these follow-up comments as well.
132.4.2.1 (f)] The mailing notification fee of $215.00 has not been paid. The fee must be paid prior to Friday, July 20ti' in
order for the initial site plan to be approved. Comment addressed.
2. [General Comment] The $100.00 review fee for the Department of Fire & Rescue has not been paid. The fee must be paid
prior to Friday, July 20t' in order for the initial site plan to be approved. Comment addressed.
3. [30.7.4] The site plan shows disturbances to areas of Preserved Steep Slopes that are not permitted. This includes the northeast
corner of the hotel parking area and dumpster, and portions of the retaining wall. Please revise the site plan so that these
features do not encroach into the Preserved Steep Slopes. Comment not addressed. These features are still shown within the
Preserved Steep Slopes. As part of the final site plan submittal, the applicant has the option to submit new topographic
information demonstrating that these preserved steep slopes are actually less than 25% subject to review and approval of the
County Engineer in accordance with Section 30.7.4 (b)(1)(h). The applicant may also revise the site layout so these areas are
not disturbed and all improvements are located outside of the Preserved Steep Slopes boundary. It appears there is still
encroachment into preserved slopes along the northern and northwestern portions of the property, including grading
activities and the demolition of existing trees that are located on the slopes. Please revise the layout in these areas to
ensure that preserved slopes are not disturbed. This comment still applies and has not been adequately addressed. If
it is thought that these slopes are less than 25%, provide additional information to the County Engineer demonstrating
that these slopes are less than 25%.
4. [ARB] Please see the attached ARB comment letter for items that must be addressed prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Please review the attached comments from the ARB reviewer.
5. [Fire & Rescue] Please see attached comments from Shawn Maddox. Please revise the plans so that Fire & Rescue comments
#3 and #4 are satisfactorily addressed. Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.1 (c)] Please show all existing utility easements on the drawings. Include a label or call out for each easement stating
whether the easement is public or private, the owner of record and the recorded instrument number, and easement width where
existing easements are visible on the plans. This comment does not appear to have been fully addressed. Show the existing
easements on the plan, with the identifying information requested above. In addition, there appear to be easement
locations shown on the Landscape Plan. These easements are not called out, however, and are not shown on other
sheets of the plan. Also, please indicate whether the temporary construction easement on the east side of the property
is existing or proposed. Comment addressed.
7. 132.5.2 (a) and 4.20 (a)] Please amend the building setback notes on Sheet 1 as follows:
a. Minimum front setback = 10 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside
of the right-of-way.
b. Maximum front setback = 30 feet from the right-of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside
of the right-of-way.
c. Side/Rear minimum = primary structure shall be constructed and separated in accordance with the current edition of
the Building Code. No maximum side or rear setback. Comment addressed.
8. 132.5.2 (a) and 4.20 (a)] Please state the required off-street parking and loading setbacks on Sheet 1.
a. Minimum off-street parking/loading front setback = 10 feet from any public street right-of-way.
b. Minimum off-street parking/loading setback side and rear setbacks = no off-street parking or loading space shall be
located closer than 20 feet to the district boundary. Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2 (a)] Please show all minimum and maximum setback lines of the final site plan site layout drawings. The setbacks
should be shown in accordance with Section 4.20 of the Zoning Ordinance.
a. The front setbacks for the hotel should be measured from the right-of-way line along Pantops Corner Way. It does
not appear to meet the maximum 30' front setback currently.
Clarify what the structure or addition is on the west side of the hotel that ensures that it meets the maximum
setback requirements. This structure appears to be different from the rest of the hotel (perhaps only a one-
story part of the building?). Also, show the distance from the parking lot/dumpster pad area to the edge of the
HC district boundary, where it meets the existing residential district, to demonstrate that side/rear setbacks
are met. Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2 (a)] There is currently a boundary line adjustment plat under review for these parcels. Please show and label all
existing parcel boundaries with dimensions on the final site plan, and update the deed book and page number of the recorded
instrument on the plans and the site data table on Sheet 1. Include the revised acreage on Sheet 1. Comment not addressed,
as there is an additional BLA plat under review (SUB2019-00002). Please show these lines on the plan sheets, and
update all site information accordingly on the cover sheet, including acreage, as well as deed book and page number
when that plat is approved and recorded. Comment not fully addressed. There is still a discrepancy, as the property
lines as shown on the plan do not match what the existing property lines are. Please revise property lines to match
existing conditions, or submit a BLA plat proposing the property lines as shown on the site plan.
11. [32.5.2 (a)] Please add the full Action Letter, Proffer Statement, and associated exhibits approved with ZMA2013-02 to the
final site plan drawings. These documents are attached to the SRC comment letter.
a. Under "Zoning" On Sheet 1, please remove the words "Application Plan" and state "Proffers dated November 26,
2013" next to ZMA2013-02.
b. State the ZMA approval date by the Board of Supervisors, December 11, 2013.
4
Comment addressed.
12. 132.5.2 (a)] Please state that TMP 78-58G1 lies within the FH Flood Hazard Overlay District on Sheet 1 under "Zoning."
Comment addressed.
13. 132.5.2 (a)] Please state that portions of TMP 78-58G1 lie within the Managed and Preserved Steep Slopes Overlay District
under "Zoning" on Sheet 1.
a. Please state that portions of TMP 78-5A and 78-513 lie within the Managed Steep Slopes Overlay District under
"Zoning" on Sheet 1.
Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2 (b)] Please state the gross square footage of each proposed structure, and proposed acreage of each use on the final
site plan. Clarify whether the square footage provided is the square footage of the building footprint, or of the entire
structure. The square footage as provided on the cover sheet is different from that labelled on the site plan sheet. Please
revise. However, it appears one may be the footprint and one may be the overall floor square footage. Please clarify.
15. [4.12.4 (a)] The retail parking required is 35 spaces. The number of parking spaces in a parking area may not exceed the
number of spaces required by this section by more than twenty (20) percent. 35 required spaces x .2 = 7 additional parking
spaces allowed.
a. [4.12.5] The total number of parking spaces provided on the parcel where the retail building will be located cannot
exceed 42 spaces without approval of a waiver from the Zoning Administrator. Please see Section 18-4.12.2 (c) and
18-14.12.2 (d) for information regarding waiver requests and information that must be submitted. Otherwise, please
removed some parking from the retail parcel to comply with the Ordinance.
Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2 (h)] Please show the boundaries of the FH Flood Hazard Overlay District on TMP 78-58G1 where visible on the
plans. Provide a label and include this feature in the legend. Please show this district on the site layout plan, so that it can
be more easily determined if the proposed development is encroaching into this district. Comment addressed.
17. 132.5.2 (b)] No loading spaces are shown on the site plan. One loading space is required for the commercial building, and
additional loading spaces must be provided on the hotel parcel in accordance with Section 18-4.12.13.
a. Loading spaces must meet the design standards specified in Section 18-4.12.18 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Comment addressed.
18. 132.5.2 (b)] No dumpsters are shown near the proposed retail building. In accordance with Section 18-4.12.13 (e), at least
one dumpster must be provided on the retail parcel. Comment addressed.
19. [4.12.19 and 32.7.9.7 (a)(3)] Please provide a profile view detail with dimensions and materials of the dumpster pad enclosure
to verify compliance with the screening requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance. Please note that fences or other
constructed screening measures must be a minimum of six feet (6') in height, as specified in 32.7.9.7 (e). Indicate the length
of the concrete pad on the site layout plan. Also, the dimensions of the site layout and the dumpster detail do not match,
with the layout saying the dumpster enclosure is 12' by 12.3', and the detail stating that the enclosure is 11' by 10'-8".
Please clarify. Comment addressed.
20. [32.7.3 (b)] Please show the locations of all proposed mechanical equipment and utility hardware. Please provide information
so that the agent can verify they will be screened from public view. Indicate on the plan where the mechanical equipment
is proposed to be situated. Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.2 (n)] Pedestrian crosswalks and accessible ramps must be provided at all locations within the site where ramps connect
sidewalks on opposite sides of vehicular travel ways and streets.
a. Please label the dimensions and surface materials in compliance with the County's design standards.
Provide pedestrian crosswalks and accessible ramps at both parcel entrances along Road B, to connect the
sidewalks on either side of those entrances, similar to how these items are provided at the entrance along Road
A. In addition, revise the Legend on the cover sheet, as the symbol provided for CG-12 does not match what is
actually shown on the plans for CG-12. Also, what are the dimensions of the crosswalks? In addition, there do
not appear to be any ramps near the accessible parking spaces to allow for ease of movement onto the sidewalks
adjacent to the building from those parking spaces. Please provide ramps._Accessible ramps need to be
provided on the island at the intersection of Pantops Corner Way and Route 250 to allow access along that
crosswalk.
22. [32.5.2 (k)] Please label all existing and proposed sewer and drainage easements by type and include a size/width
measurement. For existing easements, state the deed book and page of the recorded instrument. Show these easements
on the plan, with deed book and page numbers provided. Also, there appear to be easement delineations on the
Landscape Plan; however, there are no labels identifying what they are. Please standardize the easement labels
and locations across the plan sheets. Comment addressed.
23. [32.5.2 (1)] Please label all existing and proposed utility easements by type and include a size/width measurement. For existing
easements, state the deed book and page of the recorded instrument. Show these easements on the plan, with deed book
and page numbers provided. Also, there appear to be easement delineations on the Landscape Plan; however, there
are no labels identifying what they are. Please standardize the easement labels and locations across the plan sheets.
Comment addressed.
24. [32.5.2 (n)] Please state the proposed surface materials for all parking lots, travel ways, walkways, etc. in a label on the site
plan drawings. Comment not addressed. Indicate what the proposed surface materials are on the site plan. Comment
addressed.
25. [32.5.2 (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. Label the heights of the retaining walls on the site
layout plan. In addition, profile view details are needed for retaining walls and constructed screening measures. The
only profile view provided was for the dumpster enclosure. Comment has not been fully addressed and still applies.
26. [32.5.2 (e)] Please provide more details about the existing landscape features as described in Section 18-32.7.9.4(c).
a. 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.
It appears that the demolition plan shows demolition of trees spreading into neighboring parcels, as well as
preserved steep slopes. Please revise the demolition plan to more clearly indicate what is being demolished. If
tree removal is occurring on neighboring properties, an easement will be required; if it is occurring on
preserved slopes, please revise the layout to avoid these areas. There continue to be trees shown to be
demolished on neighboring TMP 78-5C, which does not have the same property owner as Pantops Corner. An
easement will be required to be shown for any demolition activities to occur on this property. In addition,
further clarify the proposal to demolish trees to the preserved slopes. It appears these preserved slopes, and
the trees directly adiacent to them, are not on the property owned by Pantops Corner, but instead are in the
right-of-way.
27. [32.7.2.31 Please show the proposed sidewalks along Route 250 tying to the existing sidewalks on adjoining parcels/in the
Route 250 right of way. The sidewalks are not shown connecting to the adjacent property lines.
a. Please clarify whether the proposed sidewalk along Route 20 will connect to the existing sidewalk north and south of
the development that is currently within the Route 20 right of way/on private properties.
The plan continues to show the sidewalks ending just prior to the adjacent property lines. Please show that the
proposed new sidewalks extend all the way to the existing sidewalks on the adjacent properties. Include a note
on the plans stating that the sidewalks will be extended all the way to the existing sidewalks. Include this note
for the existing sidewalks along Route 20 as well. It is currently only shown for the sidewalks along Route 250.
28. 132.7.2.31 Please provide sidewalks along both sides of Pantops Corner Way and Road B. Provide a sidewalk along the
small piece of Road B on the south side of the road in the far eastern portion of the property, to the east of the parcel
entrance for the proposed Wawa property. This sidewalk needs to be provided to ensure future interconnection with
parcel to the east. A request has been made asking the agent to vary the requirement for a sidewalk on both sides of
Pantops Corner Way, for that area to the north of Road B on the west side of Pantops Corner A. Provide more
information on the grading that would be required to install this sidewalk. Also, staff recognizes that the retail portion
of this plan has now been removed; however, the rezoning for this property from 2013 required the road and associated
improvements to be constructed before a certificate of occupancy could be granted for the hotel property. Are
retaining walls required in order for the sidewalk to be constructed in this area? Staff requires more information on
this request before a determination can be made.
A sidewalk must be provided along the western side of Pantops Corner Way. Provide a sidewalk along the entire
western portion of Pantops Corner Way from Route 250 to Route 20. Included in this revision, remove the note
discussing the sidewalk as shown "for reference only" on sheet C8. Also, the note on sheet C11 needs to be removed,
as the street improvements are required on this site plan.
29. [32.7.2.2 (f)] Please clarify whether any bicycle lanes are proposed along Road B and Pantops Corner Way. Comment
addressed.
30. [32.7.9] 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. [32.7.9.61 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.
b. 132.7.9.81 Staff cannot verify if the provided trees meet the minimum 10% canopy required for the
development without the canopy figures shown on the drawings.
Please revise the landscaping schedule and calculations. Parts of the calculations state that they will be
provided with the final site plan; however, no final calculations were provided. Also, shrubs cannot be
used for the total final tree canopy calculation. In addition, in the landscaping schedule, a few changes
must be made. The final height for American Beech should be 20. There appear to be 8 tulip poplars
shown on the plan, not the 7 listed in the schedule. Also, change the canopy calculation for the tulip
poplar. The height for European hornbeam should be 17, and for American holly should be 14.5. Also, it
should be a Burford holly (Latin name Ilex cornuta). Comment has not been fully addressed. Any
shrubs under five feet tall at 10 years cannot be counted within canopy calculations, per 32.7.9.8(b) of
the Zoning Ordinance. Revise the canopy calculations to account for this requirement. In addition, the
site area stated in the landscape schedule does not match the area as stated on the cover sheet. Please
clarify this discrepancy.
In addition, the landscape note from section 32.7.9.9(a) needs to be included on the landscape plan
identifying the season by which landscaping must be planted.
Under the parking lot landscape calculation, why is the number 176 provided? Should it be 122?
Under the landscape schedule for TMP 78-5A, it states that there are 5 American elms; however, there
appear to be 6 on the plan. In addition, it states that there are 94 northern bayberry and rhododendron
catawbas planted; however, it appears that there are actually 107 depicted.
31. [32.7.9.71 Please see ARB comments for landscaping screening requirements that must be addressed prior to final site plan
approval. Additional screening comments may be added by Planning during final site plan review. Please review ARB
comments, which are attached.
32. 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.
33. 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 final site plan approved landscape plan." Comment addressed.
34. [32.7.8 and 4.171 The final site plan lighting plan must meet the minimum requirements of Section 4.17 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
a. [4.17.4] Please provide a luminaire schedule stating the quantity of each outdoor luminaire proposed, the model
number, the fixture type, wattage emission, etc.
b. [4.17.4 (a)] Please provide documentation from the manufacturer that all proposed outdoor luminaries exceeding
3,000 lumens are full -cutoff fixtures.
c. Please state the pole height of all outdoor luminaires.
d. 14.17.4 (b)] Please show foot-candle measurements within the development and along all existing and proposed street
right of ways and property boundaries. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in
residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one-half ('/2) foot candle.
e. Please add a note to the lighting plan which states "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 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." Comment not fully
addressed. Only three catalog cuts are provided, although there are four different types of lighting shown on
the plan. In addition, it appears that two of the catalog cuts are the same. Please provide catalog cuts for all
light types. Two of the lights shown as attached to the hotel building are labelled as D; however, it appears that
those types of lights are B in the legend. Pleas revise. Also, the light labelled D-2 in the parking lot island at the
northern end of the parcel appears to be in the same location as a tree on the landscape plan. Please revise to
show the tree and light in different locations. Comment addressed.
35. [32.6.2 (d) and Chapter 141 Please submit an easement plat and application to the County that shows all new easements
proposed by the site plan. This includes all new drainage, stormwater, public access easements, etc. The easement plat must
be reviewed, approved, and recorded prior to approval of the final site plan. Comment not addressed. Easement plat
required. Comment still applies as easement plat has not vet been approved by the County and recorded.
36. [ZMA201300002, 14-234 (E), 14-317, and 14-422 (C)] As part of the easement plat application, a public access easement
will need to be platted over the Pantops Corner Way and Road B private street right-of-ways. A private street maintenance
agreement will need to be approved by the County Attorney and recorded with the easement plat. As required by Proffer #1
of ZMA2013-02, an access easement shall be provided subject to an agreement between the respective property owners to
share the cost of maintenance and construction for shared portions of the private road. A template for private street
maintenance agreement can be found on the CDD website. Comment not addressed. Easement plat and road plans are
required. In addition, the access easement must incorporate the entirety of the sidewalk and landscaping strip on both
sides of the proposed private roads. The sidewalks and streetscaping cannot be outside of the access easement.
Comment still applies as easement plat has not vet been approved by the County and recorded.
37. [ZMA201300002, 32.7.2.2 (a), 14-233 (B)(1)] As required by Proffer #1 of ZMA201300002, a separate "Application for
Road Plan Approval" will need to be filed in accordance with Chapter 14 in order to authorize and construct the private streets
identified as Pantops Corner Way and Road B. The road plan application must be approved prior to final site plan approval.
a. A certificate of occupancy shall not be issued for any buildings on TMP 78-58G1 prior to completion of construction
for Pantops Corner Way and Road B private streets. Please see proffer #2 for additional information. Comment not
addressed. Road plan required for the proposed private streets. See comments from Engineering for additional
information. Comment still applies as road plans have not vet been approved by the County.
38. [General Comment] Prior to final site plan approval, a WPO plan must be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the
Engineering Division. Please see Engineering comments below for additional information. Please review Engineering
comments, which are attached.
39. 132.6.2 (h)] Please provide a signature panel with a line for each member of the Site Review Committee. A copy of the SRC
signature panel template is attached. Comment addressed.
New Comments for 2nd Submittal
1) Revise the Source of Title and Zoning information on the cover sheet to reflect the new conditions created by the
recordation of the BLA plat approved with SUB2019-00002.
Please contact Andy Reitelbach in the Department of Community Development at areitelbach(&albemarle.org or 434-
296-5832 ext. 3261 for further information.
Comments from Other Reviewers:
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — David James, diames2(kalbemarle.org — Requested Changes;
please see the attached memo.
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — Andy Slack, aslack(cr�,albemarle.org — Requested Changes; please
see the comment(s) below:
9
1) Remove `Travelway B' as a label from the plan. That is not a valid road name and should not be listed on the
plan for the final plan to be approved.
Albemarle County Building Inspections — Michael Dellinger, mdellinger(c�r�,albemarle.org — No objection.
Albemarle County Planning Services (Architectural Review Board) — Margaret Maliszewski,
mmaliszewski(&albemarle.org — No objection; ARB approval pending issuance of Certificate of Appropriateness.
Albemarle County Fire Rescue — Shawn Maddox, smaddoxgalbemarle.org — No objection.
Albemarle County Service Authority Richard Nelson, rnelsongserviceauthority.org — Pending; comments will be
forwarded to applicant upon receipt.
Virginia Department of Transportation — Adam Moore, Adam.Moorekvdot.vir ig nia.gov — Requested Changes;
please see the attached memo.
10
PANTOPS CORNER- FINAL
SDP201800089
Engineering comments (David James):
1. Submit a VSMP plan - to be approved prior to FSP approval.
(Rev.1) VSMP plan has not been approved.
'11,....1"-"-1 -,ffsite work in an easement.
(Rev.1) Addressed.
3. orld tha 'general Construction Notes for Streets'.
(Rev.1) Addressed.
4. You're proposing to disturb areas of preserved slopes at the northern part of the site. Currently
part of the proposed parking lot & grading and retaining wall are not permitted there. (18-
30.7.4b)
(Rev.1) See comment 5 below.
5. You're claiming preserved slopes <25% in area of preserved slopes. Provide topographic survey
that shows a more accurate measurement was taken and have licensed surveyor sign/seal it.
(18-30.7.4b(1)h)
(Rev.1) Please provide an exhibit sheet comparison of the site showing the county's steep slope
overlay versus your surveyed topo. Label/highlight areas you claim are less than 25% slope.
Frank Pohl, the county engineer, will make the final determination
6. Road 'A' & 'B' to meet private road standards, nonresidential as specified in the Design
Standard's Manual, page 19.
a. Grade exceeds 10% at around STA 12+00.
(Rev.1) Road must meet minimum design standards. Follow guidance under the Road
Plan for the design. (14-412B, DSM)
b. Show horizonal road curve radius every 100 teet.
(Rev.1) Addressed.
c. Road 'B' doesn't meet minimum K-value of 15 at Sta. 10+50.
(Rev.1) Travelway access must meet minimum design standards. Follow guidance
under the Road Plan for the design. (18-4.12.17, 18-32.7.2.21
a. _)f pipe —,,jso an the p,
(Rev.1) Addressed.
7. Sheets C5/C6 - Sh. aL., grading activities or clearing/excavation outside of the property in an
easement. A letter of permission from off -site property owner is sufficient as an easement in
this case, but only for the purposes of plan review. (DSM, pg.221
(Rev.1) Addressed.
8. Show guardrail (GR-2, etc.) & detail in place of handrail before wall or dropoff greater than 3:1
next to parking or travelways.
(Rev.1) Guardrail is warranted along the back 30 spaces at north parking lot.
9. Sin—, ro*� ^ ^� 1-11 maximum height, and TW/BW elevations.
(Rev.1) Addressed.
10. Provide retaining wall design for walls that support parking or travelways (the wall in the back
corner, and the wall near the rt. 250 entrance). Include:
a. A typical detail. (VDOT standard walls are acceptable)
b. specific details as required for unusual or possibly conflicting areas. An example is where
utilities are expected to go through walls or footings.
c. certified computations to support the design. All soil and bearing assumptions, as well
as reinforcement materials and assumed loadings must be included.
(Rev.1) A separate building permit for walls over 3' required, and stamped design plans will be
required for walls over 4'.
11. Was a layer turned off for the sidewalk along road 'A' on the proposed plan sheets?
(Rev.1) Yes, it appears that on sheet C5-C7 that the sidewalk is turned off along Pantops
Corner Way.
12. Show travel lanes, traffic flow patterns, sight distance line at road intersection, stop sign at
intersection, stop sign and/or stop bar before crosswalks.
(Rev.1) Add a stop bar or stop sign for the right out from hotel parking lot.
13. Sheets C5/C11/C12 - Show proposed sight distance easement shaded/hatched outside ROW.
(Rev.1) What sheet(s)? I don't see callout.
14. Snow cam inundation zone on plan. Hccoraing to county GIS TMP 78-58G1 lies in a state uam
Break Inundation Zones.
(Rev.1) Addressed.
-J. aieuc detail. Show bumper blocks for parking spaces that are adjacent to 5' wide
--rnatively, increase sidewalk width to 6'. (18-4.12.16. e}
(Rev.1) Addressed.
16. Provide a 0.2% or greater slope to outlet in the detention/infiltration system. Alternatively,
provide copy of manufacture's statement that the system will perform as designed and that
debris/sediment accumulation will not negatively impact the system's performance.
(Rev.1) Add underdrain to bottom of detention.
17. Show outfall pipes from SWM system in an easement.
(Rev.1) Include outfall pipe/structures (A4 to Al) in the easement.
18. Show gutter pan for DI's in parking lot.
(Rev.1) They have gutter pans as shown in the details, 2' feet from face of curb.
19. Sheet C8 - Your showing trees on top of SWM facility. Install shrubs instead for the area of SWM
facility easement.
(Rev.1) Not addressed.
20. Provide concrete inlet shaping (IS-1) specified on any structure with a 4' or greater drop.
(Rev.1) Addressed.
21. Provide safety slabs (SL-1) in any structure taller than 12'.
(Rev.1) Provide SL-1 in detention MH accesses. Revise detail to show SL-1 and provide
standard ST-1 steps to 'welded step access' in the 96" pipe (Sheet C16).
22. Pro..Je ditch calc. _.._ .......� _,r_ ...._....__._...
(Rev.1) Addressed.
23. Show Rt. 20 northbound lane widening all the way to intersection of Rt. 250.
(Rev.1) Acknowledged; Follow road plan review / VDOT guidance.
24. (general) VDOT to approve entranceway
(Rev.1) Acknowledged.
Building permit required for wall.
(Rev.1) Acknowledged.
26. (Rev.1) Remove Sheet C16 from the site plan.
27. (Rev.1) Cross -walk location on road 'B' is currently unacceptable. 100" sight distance not
met.
28. (Rev.1) Sheet C8 - Provide low maintenance ground cover (not grass) for any grades
proposed steeper than 3:1.
29. (Rev.1) Sheet C7/C1S — A9Z is shown in the profiles, but not shown on utility plan.
�F'� ir/jrFs1yy �1
x •�4 yiAli
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper Virginia 22701
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
April 30, 2019
Andy Reitelbach
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP-2018-00089- Pantops Corner — Final Site Plan
Dear Mr. Reitelbach:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Shimp Engineering, P.C., dated
May 21, 2018, revised April 12, 2019, and offer the following comments.
Land Use
l . Please provide drainage calculations for proposed storm water structure tying into the
existing structure, pre and post construction for adequacy of discharge. Also please plot
HGL on profiles.
2. Sight distance profile on route 20, SDL of 415'ft., doesn't meet VDOT's requirement of
440'ft., please see VDOT's Road Design Manual Appendix F-Pg., F-34., for
specification criteria.
3. Relocating sight distance line may also impact adjacent parcel.
4. Please see appendix F, page F-23, of the Road Design Manual for minimum spacing
standards for commercial entrances, intersections, median crossovers for collector and
principal arterial highways. As proposed, an access management exception is required
and will be reviewed under a separate submission.
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 Charlottesville Residency land Use Section at (434) 422-9399
for information pertaining to this process.
Sincerely,
Adam J. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING