HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900026 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2019-09-27r� 'AL
� IRGS?at�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Ryan Yauger, Bohler Engineering
From: Cameron Langille - Senior Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: June 11, 2019
Rev1: July 30, 2019
Revision 2: September 27, 2019
Subject: SDP-2019-026 Brookhill Senior Living- Block 8A- Final 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.]
Requirements:
1. [32.5.2b] The special exception for density will need to be approved prior to the
approval of the final site plan.
Rev1: Comment outstandine. Additional information that was reauested for special
exception has not been provided to date from Collins Engineering.
Rev. 2: Special exception to shift density between blocks 8 and 4 is scheduled to go to
the Board for approval on October 16. 2019. Once approved by the Board. this
comment will be addressed.
[32.5.2a] [COD 2.3.2.3] The proposed front setback exceeds the 25' front setback
maximum as indicated in the Code of Development. While the plan was revised since
the initial site plan to move the building closer to the street, it still does not meet the
required setback. Ajustification will need to be provided to modify this requirement
from the COD.
Rev1: Comment outstanding. Justification will need to be submitted and reviewed with
next submittal.
Rev. 2: Special exception to increase maximum front setback has been approved.
Please see attached memorandum to file for ZMA201500007 and SDP201900026 for
additional details and considerations to keep in mind for future blocks.
[32.5.2n; 4.171 Sheet C801 indicates that there will be two fixtures, however only one
cut -sheet is provided. Please clarify if there is another fixture, or why there are two
symbols indicating two fixtures. If two fixtures are proposed, provide the additional cut -
sheet information for the fixture.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.2p] [32.7.9] Additional screening is needed for the parking area, as it is not fully
screened from the street. In addition, please move the screening shrubs from the
bottom of the hill (currently at the property line) to be adjacent to the
pave ment/parking/travelways. See below:
Rev1: Comment partially addressed. Additional landscaping is needed in the lower left
hand corner of the above photo. This parking area will be seen from the public road and
needs to be screened.
Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
5. [32.7.9] The conservation plan checklist on the landscape plans will need to be signed
prior to final site plan approval.
Comment addresser'
6. [32.5.2i] All easements need to be platted and approved prior to final site plan approval,
including off -site improvements. Deeds may be required for off -site improvements to
ensure maintenance.
Rev1: Comment outstanding. Easement plat has not been submitted to date.
Rev. 2: Easement plat, SUB201900138, has been submitted and is under review. Once
the plat is approved and recorded, the final site plan will need to be updated to
include the new easements and state their deed book and page number for the actual
plat and any accompany easement deeds.
7. [Proffer #4] Affordable housing of 15% needs to be provided for the 87 units that count
towards density.
Rev1: Comment outstanding. Affordable housing needs to be provided.
Rev. 2: Per applicant comment response letter, affordable housing options are
currently being discussed with the developer. Please provide additional information
and confirmation on how this comment will be addressed with the next submittal.
8. [32.5.2 (a)] On Sheet C-102, please revise the "Associated Plans" note. The proffers that
apply to Brookhill are now from ZMA201800011, approved July 17, 2019. The
Application Plan and Code of Development are still from ZMA201500007.
9. [32.5.2 (a)] Replace the proffers on Sheet C-103 and C-104 with the approved proffers
from ZMA201800011.
10. [ZMA201500007] Please fill out the Block Area Summary on Sheet C-106. Some cells are
currently blank. The applicant should coordinate with the engineer working on the
Block 8B final site plan so that all acreages are consistent between the two plans.
Please contact Cameron Langille at the Department of Community Development 296-
5832 ext. 3432 for further information.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
September 20, 2019
Ryan Yauger, P.E.
Bohler Engineering
28 Blackwell Park Lane, Suite 201
Warrenton, VA 20186
RE: ARB-2019-61: Brookhill Block 8A Senior Living, Final Site Plan
Dear Mr. Yauger,
We have received revised site plans and architectural plans for the above -noted application that address the conditions of
approval the Architectural Review Board requested at its July 1, 2019 meeting. The following revisions are requested to
make the proposal consistent with those conditions as well as the Entrance Corridor design criteria.
1. Provide the south and west elevations perspectives prior to approval of the final site plan for ARB board
review.
Rev. 1: Comment not vet addressed. A perspective view of the building from the southwest has not been
submitted. Submit the perspective views of the building for ARB board review. Please see the attached
graphic showing the direction for the southwest perspective view.
8. Provide key plans on the elevation drawings.
Rev. 1: Comment not vet addressed. Provide a "Key Plan" on the elevation drawing. The key plan should
include a plan view of the building and labels that specify which elevation applies to which side of the building.
10. Provide the standard window glass note to the architectural drawings: Window glass in the Entrance Corridors
should meet the following criteria. Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40116. Visible light
reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%
Rev. 1: Comment not vet addressed. The comment response letter states that this note will be in the final
architectural plans. However, the architectural plans have not vet been resubmitted. Please address this
comment. Please also ensure that the architectural floor plans have been revised to match the orientation of
the building prior to resubmission.
11. Provide a detail of the proposed dumpster enclosure in the site plan set.
Rev. 1: Comment not vet fully addressed. In addition to the plan view of the dumpster area that is on sheet C-
900 there should also be an elevation detail of the dumpster enclosure that specifies the height, materials and
colors of the walls and gates.
12. If roof -mounted mechanical equipment isproposed, providearoof-plan showing themechanical units' locationsand
heights as well as elevations that include the mechanical units. Clarify whether the large white rectangles on the one-story
block on what is labeled the East Elevation is in fact mechanical equipment and/or screening. Show how visibility of
all equipment from the EC will be eliminated.
Rev. 1: Comment not vet addressed. The comment response letter states that a roof plan will be provided
prior to the site plan approval. Please address the following.
a) Provide the roof plan showing the mechanical units' locations and heights.
b) Provide elevations that include the mechanical units.
c) Show how visibility of all equipment from the EC will be eliminated.
13. Include the standard mechanical equipment note on the architectural drawings: Visibility of all mechanical
equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. The comment response letter states that this note will be in the final
architectural plans. However, the architectural plans have not yet been resubmitted. This note should also be
included in the site plan. Please address this comment.
15. Show all wall -mounted lights on the architectural elevations and account for them in the lighting plan (C-801) of
the site plan set.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. Address the following:
a) Coordinate the light locations on the site plan and the building elevations.
b) Add a note under the Luminaire Schedule that specifies that the number of wall mounted units listed in
the chart are for the ground floor only and that additional light fixtures will be installed on the other
floors.
19. Fill out and sign the tree conservation checklist reproduced on C-702.
Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. Ensure that the owner also signs the conservation checklist.
Within 15 days of the date of this letter, please send me a letter (by email is acceptable) indicating whether you will or
will not proceed with these revisions. If you choose not to proceed with these revisions, staff will be unable to approve
your application. If you choose to proceed with the revisions, please forward me two set of revised drawings together with
a memo summarizing the revisions you've made. Your decision to make the revisions will suspend the 60-day review
period associated with your original submittal. However, I expect to complete the review of your revised proposal within
2 weeks of your re -submittal.
If you have any questions about this action, please contact me as soon as possible. I look forward to receiving your
revisions and completing this review with an approval letter.
Sincerely,
Paty'Saternye
Senior Planner
cc: ARB File
Crockett Corporation
435 Park Street
Charlottesville, VA 22901
T
1 18'
i
1 p°
68'
SA
2 2 26.2'
;1 OP FH (TYP.)--.,-
1 4
ROP. 6
SIDEWA
5 I 5.6'
3R aR 7
I
2 G
1 _
1 A 23 iv�r 26' 18' 6. 5.6
b" pz I A-22
PROP. LIGHT POLE
(TYP.)
V
1351
STM PROP.20'
A 21 WATER
iL— fASEtJENT
PROP. RETAINING
WALL; 4' MAX.
5, z PROP. i1.r � ..
15.1'
LOADIN I
SPACE ❑
1�
PROP, SENIOR LIVING FACILITY
256.72' FOOTPRINT 56,040 SF
4 STORIES
140 PARKING SPACES
FFE = 425.00 j
PROP.
WALL PACK PROP. 6CONC.
(TYP.)SIDEWALK
6.7' 18' 26'
Z
A-12
0
. 4
e c
a
PROP. LIGHT POLE
(TYP.) 'p
p
7
7
ao 1 t*)ti2T
- I
PROP. 6' CONC. 9
4.5'R A-20 ♦ SIDEWALK
♦ 3'R
4.5'R —"
9'
klroruS I I I °r° (Fp) I 1
-M- --==�- --sommom- --mmmomm- -4sumooff- --sommooll-
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
00�man
— u.
PROP. SWM
ACCESS
):,o A z DRIVE V
RETAINING
6' MAX. (TYP.)
Y/
4 12' t ,
ROP.13'
�C
N SWM ACCESS
Co EASEMENT h1`
ROP. 50' STORM
EASEMENT J
?;Q
CLAS AI RIP RAP
d50S
: 0.6' r
DEPTH: 1.4'
."MAINTENANCE 12 '
rn '
S ONLY" SIGN
DUM STER
CLOSURE
ROUTE 29 100' BUFF
i
OF
I
1
30'
70'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
REVISED APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. County
staff has indicated below what they think will be required as a resubmission of revisions. If you need to
submit additional information please explain on this form for the benefit of the intake staff. All plans
must be collated and folded to fit into legal size files, in order to be accepted for submittal.
TO: Paty Saternve DATE:
PROJECT NAME: ARB2019-61 Brookhill Block 8A Senior LivingFacility acility — Final Site Plan
Submittal Type Requiring Revisions () indicates submittal Code
County Project Number
# Copies
Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (E&S)
Mitigation Plan (MP)
Waiver Request (WR)
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
Road Plan (RP)
Private Road Request, with private/public comparison
PRR
Private Road Request — Development Area PRR-DA
Preliminary Site Plan PSP
Final Site Plan (or amendment) (FSP)
Final Plat (FP)
Preliminary Plat (PP)
Easement Plat (EP)
Boundary Adjustment Plat (BAP)
Rezoning Plan (REZ)
Special Use Permit Concept Plan (SP-CP)
Reduced Concept Plan (R-CP)
Proffers (P)
Bond Estimate Request (BER
Draft Groundwater Management Plan D-GWMP
Final Groundwater Management Plan F-GWMP
Aquifer Testing Work Plan (ATWP)
Groundwater Assessment Report (GWAR)
Architectural Review Board (ARB)
ARB201900061
2
Other: Please explain
(For staff use only)
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
ARB
2
Paty Saternye
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Megan Nedostup
From: Emily Cox
Rev. 2: 24 September 2019
Subject: Brookhill Block 8A - FSP (SDP201900026)
The final site plan for Brookhill Block 8A has been reviewed by Engineering. The following comments
will need to be addressed before approval:
1. WPO201900004 must be approved before final site plan can be approved. Rev. 1:
Comment not addressed. Rev. 2: Comment not addressed.
2. [Sheet C-100] Please add WPO20190004 to the list of plan references. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
3. [Sheet C-201] Show deed book & page for all existing easements, this includes the SWM
Facility easement. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
4. [Sheet C-201 ] Add to note: "plans ... and do not represent the current existing conditions
on site in the field." Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
5. Signed and sealed engineered designs for retaining walls will be necessary before plan
approval. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Rev. 2: Comment not addressed.
6. [Sheet C-301] Sidewalk adjacent to parking should be 6' wide unless bumper blocks are
provided. See County Code 18-4.12.16.e. There is a 5.5' sidewalk labeled in the SE
corner. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
7. [Sheet C-301] Provide enough dimensions or an exhibit/detail to show compliance with
angled parking and travelways per County Code 18-4.12.16 and Page 16 of the
Engineering Design Standards Manual(Section 7- C.2). Rev. 1: Partially addressed.
Ensure all dimensions and angles are shown. Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
8. [Sheet C-301] The SWM Access drive will need to be in a SWM facility easement. Rev.
1: Comment addressed.
9. [Sheet C-401] Show parking line pavement markings and ensure there are enough spot
shots to show that no parking areas are graded steeper than 5%. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
10. Provide note on landscaping plan regarding 2:1 slopes. They shall be stabilized with steep
slope grass or some other stabilized ground cover. Rev. 1: Crown Vetch is invasive and is
not recommended. Please revise note. Rev. 2: Rev. 2: Comment addressed.
pF A
GfRGSIytP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:
Ryan Yauger, P.E. (ryaugergbohlereng
com)
From:
Cameron Langille —
Senior Planner
Division:
Planning Services
Date:
September 27, 2019
Subject:
SDP201900026 Brookhill
Block 8A Final Site Plan — Special Exception Request Approval
Mr. Yauger,
The Planner for the Planning Division of the Albemarle County Department of Community Development has reviewed your
request for approval of an administrative special exception to the maximum front setback permitted in Brookhill Block 8A,
currently under review as a final site plan application (SDP201900026).
Staff hereby grants approval to your request to increase the maximum front setback from 25' to 35.7' along the front property
line. In accordance with Section 2.3.2.3 of the Brookhill Code of Development, approved with the zoning map amendment
application ZMA201500007, special exceptions to the required maximum front setback of 25' in Block 8 shall be considered
and acted on administratively during the site plan review process.
Please be aware that this approval only increases the maximum front setback of the building within Block 8A of Brookhill,
as shown on the final site plan SDP201900026 currently under review. This approval for Block 8A is based on the nature
of the proposed use, which requires a vehicular travel way around the entire building that provides adequate turnaround
space for large delivery trucks. Another factor in the approval is the site topography; Block 8A is situated in a particularly
steep section of Brookhill. Without granting the request, the subject parcel would need to be elevated above the adjacent
road and reinforced with large retaining walls in order to provide a flat site for buildings and other improvements. By
allowing the building to be placed further toward the interior of the site, retaining wall installation and site grading is
minimized. Thus, the character and form of development of Block 8A will be more consistent with the intent of the
Neighborhood Density Residential block classification called for by the Code of Development.
Staff strongly advises the applicant to carefully plan future blocks in Brookhill so that exception requests to alter the Code
of Development setbacks are minimized or cease entirely.
Sincerely,
L," f
Cameron Langille
Senior Planner
blan ig llekalbemarle.org