Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900067 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2019-12-12Tim Padalino From: Tim Padalino Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 12:49 PM To: Keane Rucker; Thomas Hickman Subject: RE: Ecovillage SDP201900067 (additional comment) Attachments: USPS-Mailbox Consolidation_2015-11-23.pdf Hello again gentlemen, When I sent the review comment letter earlier this week, I omitted one issue that I want to highlight now for your consideration: the locations of the two proposed mail kiosks. As shown on the final plan, you are proposing one mail kiosk near the front parking lot (near Lot 9A), and a second mail kiosk in the rear/interior-most portion of the proposed project (near proposed Common House 2). These proposed mail kiosks might potentially need to be consolidated and/or relocated. This is a preemptive comment, and one that's not really part of my domain as CDD-Planning staff — but I did want to bring it up now. Although I have not received any review comments from the Crozet Postmaster (or other representative from USPS) for this final site plan SDP201900070, this information is based on a memo from USPS in the relatively recent past. Please see the attached USPS letter (which includes contact information for USPS staff) for more information. Thanks very much --- Tim Padalino 1 (434)-296-5832 x 3088 From: Tim Padalino Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2019 ISS PM To: Keane Rucker <keane@shimp-engineering.com>; Thomas Hickman <thickman56@gmail.com> Subject: Ecovillage SDP201900067 Hello Keane and Tom, Please find attached the first round of review comments for the Ecovillage final site plan. You'll notice that a half dozen or so of the comments (towards the end) are requirements for this project that won't necessarily get resolved on the final site plan (and which relate to requirements involving the corresponding plats, WPO plans, road plans, etc.). There are a lot of detailed review comments on this project, so please feel free to reach out with any questions or requests for assistance that you may have. If it feels helpful to set up a meeting to discuss these comments in person, we can certainly do that as well (and can try to invite other reviewers if necessary/requested). Additionally, review comments for this final site plan application SDP201900067 are pending from a few applicable SRC reviewers, including Fire -Rescue, ACSA, and VDOT. I will forward those to you when I receive them (unless you are copied directly). Thanks very much; and please don't hesitate to contact me at any time --- Tim Padalino, AICP (434)-296-5832 x 3088 Senior Planner I Community Development Department — Planning Division https://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd MANAGER, OPERATIONS PROGRAM SUPPORT UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 10LINI TED STATES — POSTAL SERVICE Date: November 23,2015 Subject: New Developments In April 2012, the USPS revised regulation to clarify options for delivery and to provide the USPS greater autonomy in determining how deliveries are added to the Postal Service network. While curbline and sidewalk delivery remain viable and approved modes of delivery, the USPS will determine how and when to approve these modes of delivery consistent with existing Postal Operations Manual (POM) regulation regarding in -growth and both establishment and extension of delivery. Each year, new delivery addresses are added to our city, rual and contract routes which has a major impact to our delivery cost. To control costs, we need to ensure new residential deliveries are being made via centralized delivery. We must adhere to the guidelines that govern establishment of new delivery. The City/County authorities (Planning and Zoning) can not give approval of delivery service The Postal Service cannot honor agreements that have been made between Planning and Zoning and the developer. At a minimum, the USPS will work with the builders and developers to determine what the best mode of delivery is for the area prior to establishing or extending delivery service. However, as a national agency, the USPS reserves the right to establish delivery in the most consistent and cost effective means viable to meet our federal mandate of providing a free form of service that best meets the need to establish and maintain a safe, reliable and efficient national Postal Service. Please review the changes to the POM regarding Modes of Delivery and Delivery Equipment. The changes are designed to enhance our ability to increase centralized and CBU delivery. • Centralized and CBU delivery is now the default mode of delivery in business areas. Any exceptions to centralized or CBU delivery mode in business areas must be approved by the District. (631.2) • For new residential delivery, CBU is now the default. Exceptions to permit curbline delivery must be approved by the District. (631.32) • New deliveries within an existing block with an established mode of delivery no longer assume the existing mode of delivery. We can require a more efficient mode of delivery (sidewalk delivery, for example). (631.41) • While we do not control addresses for buildings, we do control the sequential ordering of addresses within any centralized delivery equipment. (631.442) • If more than one building in a complex has the same street address, the delivery equipment must be grouped at a single location even if some of the units are in a different building. (631.452) • Centralized delivery or CBU is the default option for delivery in mobile homes or trailer parks that are permanent residences. Any exceptions to centralized or CBU delivery mode must be approved by the District (631.462b) • For dormitories and residence halls not directly affiliated with colleges, the Postal Service determines the mode of delivery and can require the property owner to accept mail for all the tenants. We will not distribute mail into centralized delivery equipment. (631.52) • Delivery equipment must conform with the USPS standards for CBUs and high-rise delivery equipment, USPS STD 4C wall mounted mail receptacles. Local offices do not have the authority to approve any other centralized delivery equipment. (631.441) -2- When obsolete delivery equipment is replaced in multi -unit buildings, it must be replaced with equipment that meets current standards. (632.621) The USPS standards include options for parcel lockers that we should ensure are provided. There was also great consideration regarding safety of delivery, which also resulted in the determination the the type of delivery warrented in your area. Keith Smarte Crozet Postmaster 1210 Crozet Virginia 22932 Work 434-823-9847 Cell 434-529-0241 Keith.A.Smarte(a usps.gov