HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800003 Review Comments Letter of Revision 1 2019-11-07COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
November 7, 2019
Justin Shimp
Shimp Engineering
912 East High Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Justin shimp-engineering.com
RE: LOR #1 SDP2018-03 Hansen Road Church — Letter of Revision
Dear Justin Shimp:
Your Letter of Revision application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be
approved the following revisions are required:
[ZMA 2018-2 Proffer #1] See zoning comments, on both the LOR and the easement plat, about
the location of the trail and the trail easement. Please note that the proffer states:
• that the "Owner shall dedicate a non-exclusive easement on and across the pedestrian path
for public use." and that
• "The property owner shall maintain the path improvements...."
Based upon the zoning comment, and the wording of the proffer, the order for approvals will be
as follows:
a) The LOR is approved showing the proposed trail improvements but not easement. I know we
had previously specified the easement should be included but zoning has now specified the
order and I apologize for not having it accurately outlined this for you previously.
b) The trail is built to meet all of the requirements specified in the proffer.
c) The trail is surveyed, and its exact location and width is determined and verified.
d) The easement plat is revised to show the exact location of the 6' easement over the as built
location of the trail. A maintenance agreement is drafted and approved with the owner of the
parcel maintaining the trail. The easement plat is approved and then both the plat and the
maintenance agreement are recorded.
e) The CO for the building can be issued.
2. [Comment] See zoning comment in reference to the parking calculation. Revise the LOR as
required. Please note that based upon the change in the parking calculation specified by zoning
the number of proposed seats in the mezzanine will no longer be limited because the parking
calculation will be base on gross square feet and not the number of seats.
3. [Comment] Revise item #1 in the "Letter of Revision Narrative" to specify that additional square
footage was added to the basement and the parking calculation was changed. Ensure this note
specifies all included changes to the site plan.
4. [14-302(B) & ZMA 2018-2] Address the following in reference to the zoning classification:
a. Revise the information under "Zoning" on the coversheet to include ZMA2018-2.
b. Cloud the change to the zoning information.
5. [ZMA 2018-2 Proffer #1] Based upon zonings comment on the easement plat, and as specified
in comment number 1 above, remove the proposed easement and the notes referring to it from all
sheets of the letter of revision plan.
6. [ZMA 2018-2 Proffer #1] Include proposed grading sheet in the LOR and ensure the proposed
grading for the expansion of the trail is shown. There appears to be locations along the existing
path where the current trail barely fits between the existing drainage ditches and either the
existing grading or the grading already proposed with the approved site plan. Therefore,
adjustments to the grading will likely be required in order to expand the trail to a full 6' as
specified in the proffer and could impact existing steep slopes.
7. [Comment] There appears to be a typo in the number of spaces that were added to Rolkin Road
on the approved site plan and this LOR. Revise the note that says "56 — 9'x20' parking spaces"
to read "46 — 9'x20' parking spaces" so this note matches the number of spaces shown in the site
plan and in the parking calculation on the cover sheet.
8. [Comment] Show the clouding for all changes on all layout sheets. Cloud the proposed 6' trail,
since the width of the trail is being expanded with this LOR. Also, once the grading sheets are
added to the LOR, cloud all areas of proposed grading that are added or revised for the
expansion of the trail (along the full length of the parcel).
9. [Comment] Provide both landscaping sheets in this LOR and address any conflicts or impact to
the existing and approved proposed landscaping. Because of the close proximity of the trail to
the landscaping and existing preserved trees, and the limited area for expansion of the trail in a
few locations, additional tree protection or the relocation of the proposed street trees and
landscaping may be required.
10. [Comment] Provide clarification on why there appears to be an additional 472 square feet of
space on the main floor of the building but the footprint of the building does not appear to have
been expanded.
11. [Comment] The LOR submission has been reviewed by zoning and engineering. Attached
please their comments.
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.
If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me at
Psaternye(cDalbemarle.org or at 434-296-5832 ext. 3250.
Sincerely,
Paty Saternye
Senior Planner
Planning Division
CC: Point Church,1428 Greenbrier Place, Charlottesville, VA 22901
�OV AL
U � U M
� � IRcir�ia
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Paty Saternye
From: Francis H MacCall
Division: Zoning
Date: 11 /04/2019
Subject: SDP2018-00003 Hansen Road Church Final — L0R#1 &
SUB2019-00160 Easement plat for 6' Pedestrian Path Proffer Compliance
1. Parking calculation revisions. Please see Comments #1 and 2 below from 11/9/2018 for
context. The proper parking calculation of 5.5 spaces per 1000sgft of the gross floor area
must be used and should be revised as follows;
5.5 Spaces per 1000sgft of gross floor area
28246/1000 = 28.24 X 5.5 = 155 spaces required
Provided on Property Parking, Not on Street = 160 Spaces (Includes 7 HC)
Provided on Property Parking on Street = 26 Spaces
Total Parking Provided Onsite = 186 Spaces
The Zoning Ordinance states that the total number of parking spaces is not to exceed
the number of spaces required by more than 20%.
155 * .20 = 31, and 155 + 31 = 186 Spaces
NOTE: The 20 Parking Spaces shown along the opposite side of Rolkin Road (offsite)
are not required for this application. This note is being provided to acknowledge that
there is this parking, and it will be available for any further amendments for additional
square footage permitted by the ZMA.
Please be aware, as noted below, that eventual square footage developed up to the maximum
55,OOOsgft per the ZMA will also be calculated with the 5.5 spaces per 1000GFA calculation.
This means that if the remaining square footage were developed (55,000 — 28,246 = 26,754),
then an additional 147 spaces will be needed. Also, as noted below, the Zoning Ordinance
allows for alternatives to providing the onsite parking.
2. Please note that the location of the pedestrian path and that an easement will be established
over the path one it is constructed.
11/9/2018 — Comments provided for the final site plan approval
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 have 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,OOOsgft
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,OOOsgft 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,OOOsgft 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,OOOsgft 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 shared parking option would eventually
need a recorded agreement between property owners.
SUB2019-00160 Easement plat comments
The specific language of the approved proffer states that the pedestrian path improvements
must be made before the certificate of occupancy for any building constructed that contains
additional square footage approved as a result of ZMA 20018-00002. The proffer also states
that "Upon completion of pedestrian path improvements, the property Owner shall dedicate a
non-exclusive easement on and across the pedestrian path for public use." All of this being
said, the extension of the private street ROW will not work in this case to comply with the
proffer. The pedestrian path improvement has not been completed, and the location of that
improvement may not be within that described area. The easement over the improvement
must be shown as a separate surveyed easement and come after the pedestrian path
improvement has physically been installed.
Review Comments for SDP201800003 lFinal Site Development Plan
Project Name: HANEN ROAD CHURCH - FINAL
Date Completed: Wednesday, October 16, 201 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review sus:
Reviewer: Emily Co�� Engineering Requested Changes
-Provide letter stating that this does not affect the WPO plan (showing c-factors are still met with the increased impervious area
of the pedestrian path) -
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 1 07120'19