Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900074 Action Letter 2019-12-06COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 December 6, 2019 Mr. Scott Collins, P.E. — Collins Engineering (Primary Contact — SDP201900074) 200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902 scottgcollins-engineering com / (434)-293-3719 RE: Notice of Disapproval — Incomplete Final Site Plan Application SDP201900074 "Martha Jefferson Hospital Presidio Apartments" (plan date 11/25/2019; received 11/26/2019 for submittal date of 12/9/2019) Staff has begun review of the above -referenced plan, and regrets to inform you that the application is incomplete, and cannot be processed as a final site plan, per the following sections of the Zoning Ordinance (County Code § 18): § 18-32.4.2.7 — Period of validity of approved initial site plan. An approved initial site plan is valid as follows: a. Valid for five years; prerequisites. An initial site plan shall be valid for: (i) a period of five years from the date it is approved pursuant to this chapter, provided that the developer submits a final site plan for all or a portion of the site within one year after the approval as provided in section 32.4.3.1, and thereafter diligently pursues approval of the final site plan; and (ii) any additional period as may be provided by state law. c. Approval null and void if final site plan not submitted within one year. The failure of a developer to officially submit a final site plan as provided in section 32.4.3.1 within one year after approval of the initial site plan shall render the approval of the initial site plan null and void. For purposes of this section, the date the initial site plan is approved shall be the date that the letter of approval required by section 32.4.2.5(c) is mailed or otherwise delivered as provided therein. • § 18-32.4.3.1— Submittal of final site plan; determination of completeness. Each final site plan shall be submitted to the agent and processed as follows: a. Prerequisites to submittal. A final site plan shall not be submitted unless: (i) an initial site plan was approved for the development and it remains valid; [... ] d. Determination that plan is incomplete; notice. A final site plan not satisfying the requirements of subsection (a) shall be deemed to be incomplete and shall not be accepted for official submittal by the agent. The agent shall inform the developer in writing of the reasons for the disapproval, with citation to the applicable section of this chapter or other law, [... ] Page 1 of 2 The approved initial site plan for this proposed project is identified as SDP201800018, which was approved on May 23, 2018. Therefore, the period of validity of SDP201800018 extended until May 23, 2019, after which time the approval of SDP201800018 became null and void. As a result, your recent application SDP201900074 for a final site plan for the proposed project is not compliant with County Code § 18-32.4.3. La, and has been determined to be incomplete per County Code § 18-32.4.3. Ld, and cannot be accepted for review, and is hereby disapproved. Please do not hesitate to contact me regarding the contents of this letter of disapproval, or any other aspect of your proposed project. Respectfully, n Tim Padalino, AICP Senior Planner — Planning Services Division Albemarle County Community Development Department Wadalinogalbemarle.org (434)-296-5832 x 3088 Attachment: SDP201800018 Action Letter (May 23, 2018) Copy to File: SDP201900074 Page 2 of 2 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 May 23, 2018 Mr. Scott Collins — Collins Engineering 200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434)-293-3719 / scottgcollins-en ing eering com Mr. Alan Taylor — Riverbend Development 435 21 Street SE, Suite 400, Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434)-245-4970 / alangriverbenddev.com RE: Conditional Approval of SDP-2018-00018 (Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments — Initial Site Plan) Mr. Collins and Mr. Taylor: The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby administratively grants conditional approval to the above referenced Initial Site Plan (dated 3/26/2018). The Final Site Plan will not be approved until all review comments identified in the attached SRC review comment letter (updated 5/23/2018) have been addressed and resolved to the satisfaction of each applicable SRC Plan Reviewer, and until each SRC Plan Reviewer have indicated in writing their (tentative) approval. Please note important updates or clarifications to the following Planning comments contained in the SRC review comment letter: comment #2, comment #3, and comment #5. Please also reference updated VDOT comments (attached, dated 5/16/2018) regarding the need to submit for VDOT review and acceptance a "justification report" for any potential crosswalk across Peter Jefferson Parkway at an unsignalized location. Community Development staff remain available to assist with the coordination of this "pedestrian walkway" at an unsignalized location. This conditional 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 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and thereafter diligently pursues approval of the Final Site Plan. In accordance with Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, 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. Please be advised that 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 $1,613.00 per Section 35. l .d(3) of Chapter 18 of the Code. Please submit a minimum of eight (8) copies of the Final Site Plan to the Community Development Department (CDD). The assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies. (Note: for ACSA, please coordinate directly with Mr. Alex Morrison or Mr. Richard Nelson to determine how many copies ACSA requires; it may be more than the one (1) minimum copy specified below). CDD staff will then provide you with the first comment letter containing each agency's review comments for the Final Site Plan; after receiving that letter, please work directly with each plan reviewer to address and resolve their respective agency's requirements. The Community Development Department shall not accept submittal of the Final Site Plan for final approval signatures until each of the following agencies/reviewers indicate in writing that the Final Site Plans satisfy the attached conditions* and all other applicable requirements, and have been given (tentative) approval: SRC Members: ■ Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) — 2 copies ■ Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — 1 copy ■ Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — 1 copy ■ Albemarle County Inspections Services (Inspections) — 1 copy ■ Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — 1 copy ■ Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) — 1 copy (minimum); please coordinate directly with ACSA to determine total number of copies ■ Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) — 1 copy If you have any questions about this conditional approval, or the Final Site Plan submittal requirements, or any other aspect of your application(s), please feel free to contact me using the information provided below. Community Development staff remain available to assist. Thank you; sincerely, Tim Padalino, AICP Senior Planner / tpadalino(calbemarle.org / (434)-296-5832 x 3088 *Attached conditions: • SRC comment letter (dated 5/8/2018; updated 5/23/2018) COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 May (UPDATED: May 23, 2018) Mr. Scott Collins — Collins Engineering 200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434)-293-3719 / scottgcollins-engineering com Mr. Alan Taylor — Riverbend Development 435 2nd Street SE, Suite 400, Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434)-245-4970 / alangriverbenddev.com RE: Site Review Committee (SRC) Comment Letter for SDP-2018-00018 (Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments — Initial Site Plan) Dear Mr. Collins and Mr. Taylor: The Planner for the Planning Division of the Albemarle County Community Development Department (CDD) and other members of the Site Review Committee (SRC) have reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Initial review comments from the following SRC members are attached: Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — (attached) Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — (attached) Albemarle County Building Inspections — (attached) Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — PENDING Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) — (attached) Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) — (attached) Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference to Chapter 18 of the Albemarle County Code (Zoning Ordinance / Z.O.), unless otherwise specified. (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time; additional comments may be added or eliminated based on further review.) The Planner will either approve with conditions or deny the Initial Site Plan within 15 days of the SRC meeting. Please contact me at your convenience if you have questions or require additional information or assistance. Sincerely, Tim Pad no, AICP Senior Planner / tpadalinokalbemarle.org / (434)-296-5832 x 3088 Page 1 of 6 Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) — Tim Padalino, tpadalinogalbemarle.org — Requested Changes: 1. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(a)]: Please revise title from "Preliminary Site Plan" to "Initial Site Plan." 2. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 25A.6, 21.7, and 4.201: Maximum front setbacks are thirty (30) feet from the right- of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside of the right-of-way. The proposed site layout shows two primary structures near Peter Jefferson Parkway, neither of which meet this maximum front setback requirement. Specifically, Building #1 appears to be sited between 34' and 63' feet from the exterior edge of sidewalk; and Building #2 is sited 35' from the right-of-way. On any parcel with multiple main buildings, at least one main building shall meet the maximum setback per Z.O.4.20(a)-1. This maximum 30-foot front setback requirement may only be increased by special exception to accommodate low impact design, unique parking or circulation plans, or a unique target market design, and only upon request from and authorization by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Z.O. 4.20(a)-2 and Z.O. 33.9 and Z.O. 8.2(b). UPDATE (5/23): County Staff reviewed this issue in detail and conducted research on the applicable elements of the approved ZMA application as well as the County Code. Although building setbacks or stepbacks can be established through an approved ZMA Application Plan, this was not done on the approved ZMA application (ZMA2001-15) — so the standards contained in the Code (and referenced above) are applicable. 3. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 25A.6, 21.4, and 4.201: Maximum building heights are proposed at sixty (60) feet. This overall height is permissible; however, the proposed structures must comply with the stepback requirements. The minimum stepback requirements for any story that begins above forty (40) feet in height or for each story above the third story, whichever is less, in height shall be as provided in section 4.20 This minimum 15-foot stepback requirement may only be reduced by special exception, upon request from and authorization by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Z.O. 4.20(a)-4 and Z.O. 33.9 and Z.O. 8.2(b). UPDATE (5/23): County Staff reviewed this issue in detail and conducted research on the applicable elements of the approved ZMA application as well as the County Code. Although building setbacks or stepbacks can be established through an approved ZMA Application Plan, this was not done on the approved ZMA application (ZMA2001-15) — so the standards contained in the Code (and referenced above) are applicable. 4. [Z.O. Section 32.7.2.3] : A sidewalk must be provided, to be generally located along Peter Jefferson Parkway between the (proposed) northwest entrance and the northwestern property boundary, to establish a safe and convenient pedestrian connection to adjoining properties and adjacent employment centers. This connection must be designed and constructed to the standards established in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual, provided that all ramps for persons with mobility impairments shall be designed and constructed to the standards of VDOT. 5. [Z.O. Section 32.7.2.3] : A safe, convenient, direct "pedestrian walkway" or pedestrian connection must be provided to enable access across Peter Jefferson Parkway between the subject property and the Martha Jefferson Hospital property. This connection must be designed and constructed to the standards established in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual, provided that all ramps for persons with mobility impairments shall be designed and constructed to the standards of VDOT. UPDATE (5/23): This "pedestrian walkway" or pedestrian connection is subject to VDOT acceptance of a "justification report" as outlined in comments provided by Mr. Adam Moore, PE (attached, dated 5/16/2018). This pedestrian connection requires continued coordination with VDOT and with Mr. Kevin McDermott, Albemarle County Principal Planner (Transportation). Community Development staff remain available to assist with the coordination of this "pedestrian walkway" at an unsignalized location. The reasons for this requirement are to proactively address the likelihood of frequent unprotected, unsafe pedestrian crossings of Peter Jefferson Parkway; and to facilitate safe, convenient pedestrian mobility between places of residence and a major place of employment. The specific rationale for this requirement is that it can be reasonably anticipated that a relatively large number of pedestrian trips will occur on a daily basis between the two hundred fifty (250) dwelling units and Martha Page 2 of 6 Jefferson Hospital. Even factoring in the provision of a new sidewalk along Peter Jefferson Parkway (as required pursuant to Zoning Ordinance §32.7.2.3, and as described above in comment 4), residents of the proposed apartment complex who want to walk from the apartments to the hospital would have to make the choice to walk approximately 3,000 linear feet on sidewalks, crosswalks, and walking paths in order to safely access the hospital — and would have to choose not to exit the development, cross Peter Jefferson Parkway (without any safe pedestrian infrastructure), and access the hospital via a much more direct route approximately 550 linear feet in length. A diagrammatic exhibit has been prepared and provided with this SRC review comment letter packet for reference. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 25A.51: Provide safe and convenient on -site pedestrian connections between apartment buildings, and also between the clubhouse and apartment buildings. These connections must be designed and constructed to the standards established in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual, provided that all ramps for persons with mobility impairments shall be designed and constructed to the standards of VDOT. Specifically, such connections are required as follows: a) Between the Clubhouse and Building #1 b) Between the Clubhouse and Building #2 c) Between Building #2 and Building #3 d) Between Building #4 and Building #2 or Building #3 e) Between Clubhouse / Pool area and Building #5 f) Between the two lower parking areas (east of Building #6) and Building #6 7. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 4.12.61: The proposed development appears to contain less than the required minimum number of parking spaces. A minimum of 425 spaces are required, but it appears that only 421 spaces are shown on the Initial Site Plan. Please revise to ensure the number of provided parking spaces meets or exceeds the minimum number of required parking spaces. 8. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 32.5.2(n), 32.7.2.3, and 4.12.41: The proposed development appears to contain a total of nine (9) parking spaces that satisfy minimum ADA requirements. The "Parking Provided" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 (or any other written schedule) does not demonstrate if this total amount is sufficient, or if any of these spaces are van -accessible. Please demonstrate that the parking areas cumulatively meet or exceed all applicable minimum requirements as specified by County Code, USBC, and ADA. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 4.12.161: A number of parking spaces in the parking lot "cul de sac" immediately south of the southern end of proposed Building #3 appear to contain spaces which do not meet the minimum design requirements and improvements for parking spaces within parking areas. Specifically, nine (9) of the parking spaces shown in a curvilinear arrangement do not appear to meet the minimum design requirements specified in Z.O.4.12.16(c)-4, as they do not meet the minimum width of nine (9) feet as measured at the narrowest point along the length of the space. Additionally, please demonstrate that proposed parking spaces in the "corners" of this parking lot "cul de sac" meet all applicable design requirements, and are configured in such a way that they can be used safely at the same time. 10. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(d) and 30.7.51: The Grading & Drainage Plan on Sheet 6 shows several unlabeled retaining walls on a portion of the site within an area of Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District zoning. Please label or otherwise identify the height of all retaining walls in this area. [Note: retaining walls are not permitted to exceed six (6) feet in height within any Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District, and are subject to additional Design Standards specified in Z.O. 30.7.5.] 11. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(d) and 30.7.5]: The Grading & Drainage Plan on Sheet 6 shows an unlabeled retaining wall on a portion of the adjoining property within an area of Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District zoning. Please demonstrate permission from the adjoining property owner for this proposed use and improvements; or, alternately, please submit for review, approval, and recordation a boundary line adjustment plat (as may be applicable). Page 3 of 6 Additionally, please label or otherwise identify the height of all retaining walls. [Note: retaining walls are not permitted to exceed six (6) feet in height within any Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District, and are subject to additional Design Standards specified in Z.O. 30.7.5.1 12. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(b)]: The "Critical Slopes" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 states that "No impacts are proposed to the existing preserved slopes." However, Sheets 6 and 7 show the proposed "Primitive Trail" being sited within portions of the existing Preserved Steep Slopes. This is permissible pursuant to Z.O. 30.7.4(b)-1(d); however, please revise the "Critical Slopes" note on Sheet 1 to clarify the proposed trail's location within existing preserved slopes. 13. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Show the proposed location(s) of outdoor trash containers. The "Trash Receptacles" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 references the proposed provision of a dumpster and trash compacter; please also provide additional waste and recycling containers in the developed recreation areas and within other areas of the proposed development, and show these on the final site plan. 14. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Show the proposed location(s) of outdoor lighting. Staff acknowledge that the "Lighting" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 indicates that this information will be provided with the final site plan. 15. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Please add graphic depictions and/or notes to Sheets 3, 4, and 5 that clearly identify the location and size (in square feet) of each proposed recreation amenity (the proposed clubhouse, the pool, the tot lot, and the passive recreation courtyard). 16. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Please revise the "Recreation" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 to identify the size (in square feet) of each proposed recreation amenity (the proposed clubhouse, the pool, the tot lot, and the passive recreation courtyard). In doing so, please also clarify if the proposed "trails/walking paths through the open space areas" is included in this 36,140 SF figure; and if so, identify the quantity (in square feet or linear feet) of this particular recreation amenity. 17. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b) and 32.5.2(i)] : The "Greenway Dedication" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 and the "Dedicated Open Space" labels on Sheets 4 and 5 are unclear; it could easily be misunderstood to suggest that the 10.33 acres proposed as open space are dedicated to the County for public use. (Note: Staff recognize that the "Additional Notes" on Sheet 1 make clear that the open space will be retained under private ownership, and not dedicated to the County for public use). Please revise Sheets 1, 4, and 5 (and elsewhere, as may be necessary) to clarify this language about the "dedication" of open space. (One possible example may be to modify the title of that note and to state that the 10.33 acres are "designated... ," not "dedicated...".) 18. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b) and 32.5.2(i)] : If the proposed "primitive trail" and/or the proposed "trails/walking paths through the open space areas" are intended to be accessible to members of the general public as a recreational connection to the Old Mills Trail and the County's Rivanna Greenway and Blueway System, please ensure the site plans are revised to clearly document this on Sheet 1 ("Additional Notes" as well as the "Greenway Dedication" and "Recreation" notes in the General Notes); and please also add labels and/or brief notes to this effect on Sheets 3, 4, and 5. Additionally, if the intention is for public access, please revise Sheets 1, 3, 4, and 5 (as appropriate) to provide any pertinent information about any access easements which may potentially be granted (as may be applicable) in conjunction with the proposed "primitive trail" and/or the proposed "trails/walking paths through the open space areas." See Comment #20, below, about the possible requirement to prepare and submit easement plats for these purposes [to be determined, based on the intentions for these recreation amenities, and based on additional coordination with Mr. Dan Mahon in the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department (ACPR)]. 19. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(n) and 4.161: The proposed development does not contain all of the required developed recreation areas and minimum facilities as specified by Z.O.4.16. Specifically, Z.O.4.16.2 ("Minimum Facilities") requires the following: Page 4 of 6 • Z.O.4.16.2.1: One (1) tot lot (2,000 SF minimum) shall be provided for the first thirty (30) units and for each additional fifty (50) units • As applied to SDP201800018: (250 units = Five (5) tot lots / minimum 10,000 SF total; see 4.16.2.1 for full details of this requirement) • Z.O.4.16.2.2: One-half (1/2) court for basketball shall be provided for each one hundred (100) units • As applied to SDP201800018: (250 units = Two (2) half -courts or one (1) full -court; see 4.16.2.2 for full details of this requirement) However, pursuant to Z.O.4.16, the planning director has some discretionary authority to consider proposed substitutions for the facilities that are required by this section of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed provision of a "primitive trail" and "trails/walking paths through the open space areas" in lieu of some of the minimum required facilities would be partially acceptable (provided that the intention is to provide access to members of the general public), and partially unacceptable. Please revise as follows: A. Provide calculations (SF) of the required recreation facilities (information summarized above). B. Provide calculations (SF) of the provided (proposed) recreation facilities (see comment #16 above). C. Provide a recreation facilities proposal for review by the Planning Director and Chief of Planning that includes the calculations requested in comments #19-A and #19-B, and which describes any and all requested substitutions with supporting explanations/rationale. D. If the intent is to provide public access on the "primitive trail" and/or "trails/walking paths through the open space areas," please add a note that the "primitive trail" and/or "trails/walking paths through the open space areas" are being proposed as a recreation amenity for use by apartment residents and by members of the general public, in lieu of providing all of the minimum required recreation facilities, pursuant to Z.O.4.16. E. Increase the size and/or recreation equipment for the one (1) proposed tot lot, and/or provide one (1) or more additional tot lot(s). F. Please review the proposed locations, alignments, material specifications, and "Classification" of the proposed "primitive trail" and any proposed or potential trail -related infrastructure in collaboration with Mr. Dan Mahon in the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department (ACPR). G. Add a note which states that the "primitive trail" and any proposed or potential trail -related infrastructure will be designed and constructed in accordance with the applicable specifications in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual. H. Add a note that states the following: "Per County Code 18-4.16.3.2, recreational equipment and facilities shall be maintained in a safe condition and replaced as necessary. Maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owner if rental units or a homeowners' association if sale units." I. Add a note that states the following: "Per County Code 18-4.16.3.3, recreational facilities shall be completed when fifty (50) percent of the units have received certificates of occupancy." 20. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(s) ("Additional Information")]: As noted above in comment #11, this proposed development (as shown on the Initial Site Plan) requires you to demonstrate permission or authorization from the adjoining property owner for the proposed use and improvements shown on Tax Map Parcel #78-20M1 (Worrell Land & Development); or, alternately, requires you to submit for review, approval, and recordation a boundary line adjustment plat. Additionally, as noted above in comment #18, it may also be necessary to prepare and submit an easement plat to establish public access on the proposed "primitive trail" if the intention is to provide members of the general public with a recreational connection to the Old Mills Trail and the County's Rivanna Greenway and Blueway System [to be determined, based on the intentions for these recreation amenities, and based on additional coordination with Mr. Dan Mahon in the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department (ACPR)]. Additionally, one or more requests for special exceptions may need to be prepared and submitted for review by the Board of Supervisors; please see comments #2 and #3 above. Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) David James, diames e,albemarle.org — Requested Changes (5/7/18); see attached comments. Page 5 of 6 Albemarle County Information Services (E911) Elise Kiewra, ekiewra(c�r�,albemarle.org — Requested Changes (4/16/18); see attached comments and letter. Albemarle County Building Inspections Michael Dellinger, mdellingergalbemarle.org — Requested Changes (4/30/18); see attached comments. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue Shawn Maddox, smaddox@albemarle.org — PENDING; review comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Albemarle County Service Authority Richard Nelson, rnelson =,serviceauthority.org —No Objection (5/4/18); see attached comments. Virginia Department of Transportation Adam Moore, Adam.MooreLa)vdot.vir ig nia.gov — Requested Changes (4/26/18); see attached comments and letter, as well as attached comments regarding the need for a "justification report" for a pedestrian crossing of Peter Jefferson Parkway. Page 6 of 6 "Sidewalks and Other Pedestrian Ways" requirements for SDP201800018 [per Z.O. 32.7.2.3] (see Review Comments #4 and #5 in SRC Comment Letter dated 5/8/2018) 78 ,�O - r�W78-71E(Note, �Some items on map may not appear in legend) n �. RgDsafe a N`bR 01n,lo 5 pedestrian ©SpR� Er ,oN a - °y ` connection 1 .y 9 (+3,000-) I , F I new sidewalk required along Peter Jefferson Parkway Propos %r%nrfn-%dn ; j��T"- 4 10 fl .. i� �• �. �' S� 1 { s wt "� new crosswalk Wo its required across 78-20M1 aA Peter Jefferson , Parkway HIM y of nt9e ��� IIII � GIS-Web Geographic Data Services �, www.albemarle.org y�`RG.. (434)296-5832 Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources May 4, 2018 Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments Date Completed: Monday, May 07, 2018 DepartmentfDivision/Agency: Review Sys: Reviewer: David James 7_1 CDD Engineering Requested Changes 1- Label locations of walls maximum height and TW/BW elevations- 2- Where there are proposed trails provide that they meet County trail standards (Design standards manual, sect- 7H)- 3- Existing conditions — Label the names of watercourses- Show limits of dam break inundation zone- Fix labeling of (managed versus preserved) slopes- 4- Grading plan -Any cut or fill shall be rounded off to eliminate sharp angles at the top, bottom and side of regraded slopes - Provide additional retaining wall, reverse slope benches and/or surface water diversions to break up the constructed slopes on the west side of site [18-30-7-5]- 5- Label entrances, curb & gutter with appropriate VDOT designations (CG-2, etc-)- 6- Label street widths and show stationing- 7- Show profiles for the proposed streets, and cross -sections. 8- Show address sign and stop sign locations at road intersections- 9- Provide a temporary or permanent turnaround at end of road past the proposed SWM pond- 10- Show bumper blocks for parking spaces in front of 5' sidewalks- 11- Show guardrail alongside the road and back of parking lots where there are retaining walls and/or slopes over 3:1- 12- Show street right-of-way and any existing easements with deed book and page references- 13- Show all proposed utility easements- 14- Show any proposed disturbance outside of property line in an easement- 15- Show turn and taper lanes with lengths and widths labeled (taper at 12:1 with 12' lane widths)- 16- Provide safety provisions for any walls over 30'°- This is typically a guardrail, wall, or fencing- 17- Provide certified computations to support the design- All soil and bearing assumptions, as well as reinforcement materials and assumed loadings must be included- 18- Where any utilities may conflict with retaining walls provide details- 19- Drainage design may be requested to be reviewedlshon on the site plan- 20- Submit a VMP application & plan for review_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10511012018 Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan I - Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments Date Completed: Monday, April 16, 2018 DepartmentlDi+visionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: LEIise Kiewra CDD E911 Requested Changes per site plan dated 31 6l18, see uploaded letter Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS - E911 APPLICATION#: SDP201800018 TMP: 07800-00-00-020M3 DATE: 4/16/2018 FROM: Elise Kiewra ekiewra@albemarle.org Geographic Data Services (GDS) www.albemarle.org/ads (434) 296-5832 ext. 3030 The blue, red, and highlighted roadways will each need a name for a total of 3 named roads. Please call with any clarifications and examples. 0 Ln N We recommend providing three (3) candidate names for each road to our office for review, in case your first choices are not acceptable. A PDF version of the Ordinance and Manual can be found here: https://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms Center/Departments/Geographic Data Service s/Forms/Road Naming and Property Numbering Ordinance and Manual.pdf Please consult the County's Road Name Index to check your road names prior to submittal. The Index can be found here: httD://www.albemarle.oro/albemarle/upload/imaaes/webaDDs/roads/ Parcel and mapping information can be found here: http://gisweb.albemarle.or If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan 0 Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments Date Completed: Monday, April 30, 2018 DepartmentlDi+visionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: Michael Dellinger LJ CDD Inspections Requested Changes E Need separate building permit for retaining walls exceeding 3 feet of unbalanced fill and engineered stamp drawings for walls exceeding 4 feet in height_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018 Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan I - Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments Date Completed: Friday, May 04, 2018 DepartmentlDi+visionfAgency: Review sus: Reviewer: Richard Nelson AOSA No Objection I recommend approval for SDP 01800018 - Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments - Initial Site Plan with the following conditions= Submit 3 copies of plan set to ACA for waterlsewer review_ RWA sewer flow acceptance will be required_ For budgeting purposes draft waterlsewer connection fees are 1_i3 million dollars_ Official connection fees will be determined at a later date_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018 Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan - Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments Date Completed: Thursday, April 26, 2018 DepartmentlDi+visionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: Adam Moore. VDOT � Requested Changes Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018 Stephen C. Brich, P.E. Commissioner COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Haad Culpeper Virginia 22701 April 22, 2018 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Tim Padalino Re: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments- Initial site plan SDP-2018-00018 Review #I Dear Mr. Padalino: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated March 26, 2018, offers the following comments: Land Use I. Entrance width needs to be a minimum of 30', please see VDOT Road Design Manual for commercial entrance designs along highways with curb and gutter. Please see Appendix F, F-125 and figure 4-10. 2. Please insert WP-2 standard detail. 3. The mill and overlay will require work on Peter Jefferson Parkway. Please provide an MOT plan in accordance with the Virginia work area protection manual. 4. Please label right of way width, speed limit and route number of Peter Jefferson Parkway. 5. Radii need to be a minimum of 25' on both entrances. 6. Cross walk should be closer to Peter Jefferson. So that the stop bar is behind the crosswalk. Also pedestrians will be more visible to traffic turning into the entrance. 7. Please provide sight distance lines on plan and profile sheets. Also the end point of sight distance must be visible. Please refer to Appendix F-Pg.F40., table 2-5 for determination of intersection sight distance. Please note that the final site plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual Appendices B (1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations, or other requirements. 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. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING April 22, 2018 Tim Padalino Page 2 A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the VDOT Charlottesville Residency Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments Date Completed: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 DepartmentIDivisionfAgency: Review sus: Reviewer: Adam Moore VDOT H Requested Changes I have discussed a potential pedestrian crossing with our District Traffic Engineer and have been given the following comments: } 1 _ The need for a crossing will be required to be shown through a justification report similar to what the county provided for the Route 250 crossing near Harris Teeter in Crozet- 2- The location should be selected where pedestrians would only have to cross two lanes at a time, being able to use the median as refuge_ 3_ Stopping sight distance would need to be verified- 4- Warning signs, high visibility crosswalk striping, and potentially flashing beacons may all be required (upon review of a plan) 5_ Please refer to TE Memorandum 384 which can be found here: http:!lww-virginiadot_orglbusiness/resources111M1TE-384_Ped_Xing_Accommodations_UnsignaIized_Locs_pdf Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10512-T2018