Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201900014 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2020-01-03�jRGINS�' COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 January 3, 2020 Scott Collins, PE — Collins Engineering 200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902 scottgcollins-en ineering com / (434)-293-3719 Review Comment Letter #1 / ZMA-2019-00014 (Commercial Development — TMP #61-134A) Mr. Collins: Members of Albemarle County staff and our partner agencies have reviewed your application materials for Zoning Map Amendment ZMA-2019-00014. Review comments are provided below, organized by Department, Division, or agency. Please review these comments, and review the options for possible next steps as described in the enclosed Action After Receipt of Comment letter. As always, CDD staff remain available to provide assistance and discuss this comment letter, potential next steps, and/or any other aspect(s) of your application, at your request. Thank you. Respectfully, MI Tim Padalino, AICP Senior Planner I Community Development Department I Planning Division tpadalino(a),albemarle.org 1(434)-296-5832 x 3088 Page 1 of 10 CDD—PlanninI4 (Review Status: "No Objection"—1/3/2020) The following CDD-Planning review comments are organized as follows: • How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan / Master Plan / Small Area Plan • The Neighborhood Model Principles analysis • Additional Planning comments and conclusion Comprehensive Plan: Comments on how your proposal conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, Places29 Master Plan, and Rio/29 Small Area Plan will be provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The comments below are in preparation for the Planning Commission review, and may change based on direction from the Commission and/or with subsequent submittals. The "subject property" for this proposal includes one parcel of record identified as Tax Map / Parcel #61-134A. The subject property is an undeveloped, forested 0.9-acre parcel in the Development Area, within an area subject to the recommendations contained in the Places29 Master Plan and also the Rio/29 Small Area Plan. The current zoning is "Planned Development — Shopping Center" (PDSC) and is designated for "Flex" Future Place Types in the Rio/29 Small Area Plan. ZMA-2019-14 : TMP #61-134A Future Land Use Plan Places29 -- Legend 11 ;1viPn� L8 ' • R � � ° rso R..l rq u.eimo C_G x� MuwP1n M-a ih� La -_r h��at,nbi .-0 meek Cr �twa. `Rd 4 ac �4aorr�ore swsa c.e� P.rY}Rf Ytgrl lln l 14e &,AMe. PW V G_ rti.1.W N,YO 4MY ■ LY bwv eY Aus�i.ft • —w., I :wlrorw p � • aWa OPn 5e�e • PM1rH. PP..• 9qe. TMP a �� #61-134A Rr° q ID''}� ir7 Qod[`alallot� �uOso r+' `VI °p S —a Brl°olr �tNI khlphl..t d . °mm°n 1 ko�� \ 111sda1 br 1 f �a y rw unr iw wrw`'.�A�pwlkwm.aso��rmAdAry nwn.....�.iww.htirl�-•��wJWb�wY..r�b�y.Y.n b. uw, ram... iwr. •mw mr.rad.pw.wnm�W�rva. b.rw.n srwr�� Lww,x xr� ty Wei rrw ry � Mewa-n��n M •rynw www.. n. dw iwA�lw.w � Yfn w�w� IVA�� M'®. XYn Nnan M. •�A•yn^ �w �..i Places29 Future Land Use Plan, showing TMP #61-134A as being subject to recommendations in the Rio/29 Small Area Plan. Page 2 of 10 i. i . i ....... •.'tiFNw�n w�llt�l.wrlY tiwiw�i.�dluM v.w�.wawdgw.wrA w��n/nm Mra..�....lw�l� Aga . •• rr.�r. rp M1. •1r. .. .. � .. .. .. ..- .. . r.. �.� �yh� w{'�NYiw�.��'V�.M ?��6 ]�lil Rio/29 Small Area Plan, showing TMP #61-134A within the "Flex " Future Place Type designation. This ZMA application requests approval of a ZMA Application Plan for the subject property's portion of an existing Planned Development — Shopping Center (PDSC) zoning district. The proposal is not a request for the County to rezone the subject property or otherwise amend the zoning map; the existing zoning is PDSC, and the proposed zoning is PDSC. County approval of this type of ZMA application is a requirement of Zoning Ordinance (ZO) Section 8 ("Planned Development Districts — Generally"), Subsection 8.5.5.5 ("Site plan and subdivision plat requirements when there is no application plan."). That ZO section requires Board of Supervisors (BOS) approval of a ZMA Application Plan prior to staff review or approval of a Site Plan in circumstances when an existing Planned Development zoning district was previously established by the BOS without an Application Plan showing the conceptual development of all portions of the overall Planned Development zoning district. The proposal for ZMA201900014 (see excerpt below) shows the development of the subject parcel in two phases. The first phase, along the frontage with US-29 / Seminole Trail, is the development of a two-story retail commercial structure with parking, landscaping, and a 14' wide shared -use path. The second phase, in the rear portion of the parcel behind and above a large retaining wall, is undetermined or undisclosed (identified only as "Future Development" on the Application Plan). Page 3 of 10 GRAM sc" R9673 Ra Pl v Y. w.m" -sr we w �e-L.7Y {fir mm we PM1 e1 ski AWkKT i /r .d wv 41-mRtr WL pgppoml1lV7aln NG 1 �P-S.LEG X — EELOP • P.LtSE a 'Ir f 1� I■0 . !ui-7u +S V oso acAEs - -- G,wu t Y111�1f PR�POSEO vARIaPIG L C. �E Wtk tits lylfl� MUCH [WatoP•PNASEi I aR w. ». b■ W9■OP �+ 930 AGUES e I f ■ rnl* q4 rJ (.ri .wu 1 f.r..ua ums I p►u�st n o ruru�u�tnuuprr ■ � 0 ■ umrwls a;enc t iauar ooWaxr I mw+cH R4=)§C AND rwLrn ooaruir LFJ�LR P%Q= 51 �O01lUW �,.� �.w.a■ rrw �`` os ppy.s �aE. ■c axa IR .vaFES5 L6'i:C"OF oir I { ! _ .a i+n■sc.+.c ru � � � © ■.".■ !nr earn....wor. © 1.4ft W yid. W p.fe m ,�•.� o!Kl�+n.• wrt. ; :!�—iIAATnauNE •• sEE rH6sHEET - Excerpt from Application Plan showing proposed development of TMP #61-134A in two phases. The parcel characteristics of subject property TMP #61-134A (including size and location) have been taken into careful consideration by staff when evaluating the appropriateness of this proposal relative to recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan, Places29 Master Plan, and Rio/29 Small Area Plan. TMP #61-134A is a relatively small parcel (0.9 acres) located on the extreme southern edge of the Rio/29 Small Area Plan area. The location, elevation, and topography of this parcel result in portions of the subject property having as much (or more) natural physical relationship with the conventional strip commercial development (to the south along US-29 / Seminole Trail) than with the Rio/29 Small Area Plan area (to the north). The current context of the Rio/29 area that adjoins this subject property is in a "pre -redevelopment" status. The adjoining area includes the outer perimeter of a large surface parking lot, as well as an internal travelway for Fashion Square Mall. There is not very much existing urban context for this proposal to respond to. Additionally, it is anticipated that the adjoining context will change in very substantial (but currently unknown) ways in the future. In summary, in consideration of the uncertainty associated with the "pre -redevelopment" status of the adjoining Rio/29 area and the particular location and size of this subject property, staff believes that the proposed development of this parcel as shown on the ZMA Application Plan is generally acceptable. Staff believes that the development of TMP #61-134A can occur prior to, and somewhat independently Page 4 of 10 from, the potential future redevelopment of Rio/29 - without restricting, confining, or otherwise negatively impacting the future redevelopment of the Rio/29 Small Area Plan area. Staff also acknowledges that the proposal is a phased development of the subject property, and that the location of proposed phase 2 will likely allow the future development of this subject property to be more oriented towards and responsive to the potential future redevelopment of the Fashion Square Mall property, and/or the potential future construction of a proposed new "avenue" between US-29 and Hillsdale Drive along the northern boundary of this parcel. Staff strongly recommends that phase 2 of the proposed development have a significantly stronger physical and operational relationship with the infrastructure, development, and uses that are recommended for adjoining and nearby areas in the Rio/29 Small Area Plan. Regarding how the proposal embodies recommendations within the Rio/29 Small Area Plan: • The subject property is within the "Flex" Future Place Type designation. The proposed form of the development is a two-story primary structure that complies with the maximum setback requirement from US-29; the proposed building location and height are generally acceptable with regards to the Flex Future Place Type recommendations. • The proposal includes a 14'-wide Shared -Use Path along US-29, as recommended in the Small Area Plan. • The proposal also includes landscaping along the proposed 14' Shared -Use Path near the property's frontage along the public right of way. Analysis ofNeiyhborhood Model Principles: In 2001, the County adopted the Neighborhood Model (NM), which consists of twelve different recommended characteristics to guide the form of proposed development projects within the Development Areas. Initial comments on how well the proposed development meets the principles of the Neighborhood Model are provided below, to the extent that NM analysis can be conducted at this time with the materials provided to date. More detailed comments will be provided at a later date in conjunction with the preparation of a staff report. Pedestrian Orientation The proposal includes a 14' wide shared -use path along US 29 / Seminole Trail. Principle met. Mixture of Uses This proposal for this 0.9-acre site includes two phases. The first phase is for retail commercial use. The second phase and future use is undetermined or undisclosed at this time, but the possibility exists for a future mix of uses on this small parcel. Staff acknowledges that this proposal is for one small portion of a larger Planned Development - Shopping Center zoning district, which is intended "to permit the development of neighborhood, community and regional shopping centers" and provide "a broad range of commercial and service facilities." Principle can potentially be met on this parcel; and principle is only partially applicable. Neighborhood Due to its size and location, this small parcel on the edge of the Rio/29 Small Area Centers Plan area is not likely to play a central or primary role in the establishment of a new neighborhood center. However, retail commercial uses can support the functionality and vitality of nearby neighborhood centers, which are expected to contain a mixture of uses and a higher concentration of amenities. Principle is not met; but principle is only partially applicable. Page 5 of 10 Mixture of Principle is not applicable. Housing Types and Affordability Interconnected There is limited application of this principle due to the size and location of this Streets and parcel, and due to the significant topography across the site and relative to adjoining Transportation properties. The proposal includes a shared entrance on US-29. The future phase 2 of Networks this proposal should be oriented towards the recommended new "avenue" that would provide a new vehicular interconnection between US-29 and Hillsdale Drive. Principle is not met; but principle is not directly applicable. Multi -modal The proposal includes a 14' wide shared -use path along US 29 / Seminole Trail, Transportation which will support pedestrian and bicycle mobility and improve access to nearby Opportunities transit stops. Principle is met. Parks, The proposal includes a 14' wide shared -use path along US 29 / Seminole Trail, but Recreational does not include other open space or recreational amenities. It is not clear if any such Amenities, and amenities or open space would be provided in phase 2 of the proposed development., Open Space Principle is partially met. Additional analysis is provided above on page Buildings and No architectural elevations or other details were provided with this ZMA application. Space of Human Staff acknowledges that an ARB application for this subject property has been Scale submitted to Community Development for review. Evaluation pending. Relegated Phase 1 of the proposal includes parking areas located generally to the side and rear Parking of the proposed primary structure, which complies with the minimum and maximum front setback requirements. The majority of the area between the primary structure and the public right of way would consist of a 14' wide shared -use path and landscaping. Principle is generally met. Redevelopment Principle is generally not applicable. Respecting The subject property includes approximately 35' of elevation change, with the Terrain and property sloping up and away from US-29. Some portions of the site have a more Careful Grading natural physical relationship with US-29, while other portions of the site have a more and Re -grading of natural physical relationship with the adjoining properties uphill (including Fashion Terrain Square Mall). The parcel includes some Managed Steep Slopes. Due to these conditions, development of this property would require extensive grading and the use of retaining walls. Because this property contains Managed Steep Slopes Overlay areas and is also within the Entrance Corridor Overlay, the necessary retaining walls would be required by Ordinance to comply with the design standards contained in ZO Section 30.7.5. As shown on the application materials, this proposal does not appear to comply with the applicable design standards (relating to the maximum height of retaining walls, as well as the minimum separation and landscaping of terraced retaining walls). Principle is generally not met. Clear Boundaries Principle is not applicable. with the Rural Area Page 6 of 10 Additional Planning Comments & Conclusion: Staff analysis of application materials for ZMA201900014 includes the following initial conclusions: Factors Unfavorable: 1. The proposed project involves the demolition, disturbance, and development of one of the only undeveloped forested parcels in the Rio/29 area. 2. The retaining wall shown on the Application Plan may not be appropriate or permissible. a. Retaining walls in the Entrance Corridor overlay district are subject to design standards specified in Z.O. Section 30.7.5 (which include limitations to the maximum height of retaining walls and minimum separation and landscaping of terraced retaining walls). b. The information provided with this application does not indicate that the proposed retaining wall will comply with these design standards; more information and/or revision may be required with this ZMA application. c. Any subsequent site plan application for this proposed development would need to demonstrate compliance with the applicable design standards. Factors Favorable: 1. The proposed phase 1 use is permissible by right within the existing PDSC zoning district. 2. The proposal would bring this portion of the existing PDSC zoning district into compliance with the requirements of Z.O. Section 8.5, which requires an approved Application Plan for Planned Development districts. 3. The proposed development is partially consistent with multiple applicable Neighborhood Model Principles. 4. The proposed development is partially or potentially consistent with the following recommendations contained in the Rio/29 Small Area Plan: a. 14' Shared -Use Path along US-29; b. The rear portion of the site (which has a substantially higher elevation than the front portion along US-29, and which has more of a physical connection to the surrounding Fashion Square Mall property) is reserved for a second future phase of development. This phased development approach could (and should) result in phase 2 being more oriented towards and responsive to the potential future redevelopment of the Fashion Square Mall property, and/or the potential future construction of a new avenue between US-29 and Hillsdale Drive. In addition to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, please also be advised that all zoning map amendment applications are evaluated relative to the "factors to be considered" specified in ZO Section 33.27(B). CDD-ARB (Review Status: "See Recommendations"—12/18/2019) Written review comments from Principal Planner Margaret Maliszewski are attached. CDD-Zoning (Review Status: "Requested Changes"—12/27/2019) Written review comments from Senior Planner Lea Brumfield are attached. CDD-Engineering (Review Status: "See Recommendations"—1/2/2020) Written review comments from County Engineer Frank Pohl, PE, CFM are attached. Page 7 of 10 Albemarle County Fire & Rescue (Review Status: "No Obiection"—12/18/2019) Written review comments from Deputy Fire Marshall Shawn Maddox are attached. Albemarle County Service Authority / ACSA (Review Status: "No Obiection"—12/16/2019) Richard Nelson, PE indicated a review status of "No Objection" from ACSA regarding this ZMA application. However, ACSA did provide eight written review comments, which are attached. Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority / RWSA (Review Status: "No Obiection"—12/6/2019) Written review comments from RWSA indicating "No Objection" are attached for reference. Virginia Department of Transportation / VDOT (Review Status: "No Objection"—12/17/2019) Written review comments from Area Land Use Engineer Adam J. Moore, PE are attached. Action after Receipt of Comments: After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on the following pages titled "Action After Receipt of Comment Letter." Resubmittal: If you choose to resubmit, please submit revised application materials on one of the formal resubmittal dates. There is no fee for the first resubmittal. Please contact me if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss this comment letter or any other aspect of your proposed project, or to share any questions or requests for assistance you may have. As noted above, my phone number is (434) 296-5832 x. 3088, and my email address is tlpadalinogalbemarle.org. Page 8 of 10 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER FIRST SET OF COMMENTS Your project has been scheduled for a public hearing by the Planning Commission (PC) for February 19, 2020, which is the latest available PC meeting within 90 days from the date your application was accepted for review. State Code requires a 90-day review by the PC unless the applicant requests deferral. If you would like to address the review comments through revision and resubmittal, you must request deferral by Friday, January 17. (Instructions for requesting a deferral are outlined below.) Please note that you can submit revisions, and continue to receive review comments from County staff, even if you choose to defer your application. If you choose not to request deferral, staff will take your project to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on February 18, 2020 as originally submitted. No later than Friday, January 17, 2020, please indicate in writing your intended course of action: (1) Resubmit in response to review comments by the date noted above; or (2) Request deferral pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 33.52; or (3) Proceed to Planning Commission public hearing on February 18, 2020; or (4) Withdraw your application (1) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments Due to the 90-day review by the Planning Commission as required by State Code, there is not a resubmittal date available between the date of this letter and the date of the February 18, 2020 PC Public Hearing. However, if you choose to defer and then resubmit (see option (2), below) please be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last page of your comment letter with your submittal. The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal. Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (2) Deferral requested To request deferral, you must submit a request in writing to defer action by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. The request may be made by email. You may request a deferral for up to 36 months from the date your application was accepted for review, which is November 18, 2022. However, all outstanding information necessary for PC action must be Page 9 of 10 submitted no later than August 18, 2022, and in accordance with the published resubmittal schedule. (See Section 18-33.52 of the Albemarle County Code.) (3) Proceed to Planning Commission Public Hearing on February 18, 2020 At this time, you may request that your application proceed to public hearing with the Planning Commission on February 18, 2020. With this option, staff will take your project to the PC as originally submitted. (4) Withdraw Your Application If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing. Resubmittals As stated above, a deferral does not preclude you from resubmitting the application to address changes based upon the comments. If you would like to resubmit after you defer, you may do so in accordance with the resubmittal schedule. Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last page of your comment letter with your submittal. The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal. Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. Failure to Respond An application shall be deemed to be voluntarily withdrawn if the applicant requests deferral pursuant to subsection 33.52(A) and fails to provide within 90 days before the end of the deferral period all of the information required to allow the Board to act on the application, or fails to request a deferral as provided in subsection 33.52(B) or (C). Fee Payment Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter. Make checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review Coordinator. Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system, accessed at http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685. Page 10 of 10 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Wednesday, December 18, 01 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Status: Reviewer: Margaret Maliszewski 7-1 CDDARB See Recommendations The ARB will review this proposal on January 21, 2020_ Comments will be available after that meeting_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo'U022020 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Fnday, December 27, 201 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: Leah Brumfield �3CDD Zoning I Requested Changes Nd 1 _ Traffic and Access: The applicant's proposal notes that the site currently has an existing access entrance from Route n 9 that serves as the access to the site_ However, the proposed access to the site shown on Sheets 1 and 3 of the -TMP 61- 134A— Commercial Development Rezoning Application Plan" show access to the site from the adjacent parcel TMP 61-134_ A retaining wall currently separates the two parcels, located on the adjacent parcel TMP 61-134_ Indicate on the application plan how access to the site will be ensured_ Access to the site will be required for both construction and use of the site- _ Please note the proposed access to the site will encroach upon existing Managed Slopes, and the development must meet the design standards listed in County Code Sec_ 30.7.5_ 3_ Distinguish on all pages of the application plan that the 10' parking and building setback is a setback minimum and the 30' building setback is a setback maximum- 4- Managed slopes are not shown on Sheet 1 of the "TMP 61-134A— Commercial Development Rezoning Application Plan" but are shown on the key If the slopes are not intended to be portrayed on Sheet 1, remove the notation from the key_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo'U022020 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Thursday, January 02, 2020 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Status: Reviewer: LFrank Pohl 7_1 See Recommendations - Retaining wall may not be allowed to cross property lines without an easement and agreement- - Parking may need to be adjusted to minimize backing into the entrance- -An access easement may be required across TMP 06100-00-00-13400, if not already provided, to secure vehicular access to the site_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo'U022020 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Wednesday, December 04, 201 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: Michael Dellinger No Objection Comments for siteplan will be added at SDP review_ Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo 7022 220 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Wednesday, December 18, 01 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: Ishawn Maddox �3 No Objection Fire Rescue has no objections to the ZMA, site plan comments will be made during that process_ SNM n Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo 7022 220 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Monday, December 16, 2019 Departmentlaivision/Agency: Review sus: Reviewer: Richard Nelson �3 AOSA I No Objection Nd AOSA has no objections for this ZMA, but identified the following comments (below)_ The applicant should be aware of the comment regarding the water main, and the only new comment for them would probably be the sewer_ 1) Is this site in the jurisdictional area for water and/or sewer? Yes ) What is the distance to the closest water and sewer line, if in the jurisdictional area? Water is stubbed out on the edge of site_ Sewer is south of the bank approximately 280 feet_ 3)Are there water pressure issues which may affect the proposed use as shown on plan? Water pressures in the area are high_ PRV will be needed_ 4) Are there major upgrades needed to the water distribution or sekver collection system of which the applicant and staff should be aware? N/A 5)Are there other service provision issues such as the need for grinder pumps? N/A 6) Which issues should be resolved at the SPIZMA stage and which issues can be resolved at the site plan/plat stage? 7) If the project is a large water user, what long term impacts or implications do you forsee? 8)Additional comments? ACAwould be willing to explore allowing a public sewer extension to be owned and maintained byACA_ Depending on the condition of the water main to be connected to, replacement of the existing portion may be required_ Offsite easements for sewer will be needed n Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo 7022 220 Review Comments for ZMA201900014 Project Name: TMP61-134A - COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Date Completed: Fnday, December 06, 201 DepartmentlaivisionlAgency: Review Sys: Reviewer: �IRWSA El I No Objection N. Comments: A 1 _ Any proposed water connections to RWSA's waterline needs to be approved by RWSA_ To be filled out by RWAfor ZMA's and P's 1_ Capacity issues for sewer that may affect this proposal None Known _ Requires Rivanna Water and SewerAuthority Capacity Certification Yes -No 3_ Water flow or pressure issues that may affect this proposal None Known 4_ "Red Flags" regarding service provision (Use attachments if necessary) None Known Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: Fo 7022 220 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper. Virginia 22701 Stephen C. Brich, F.E. Commissioner December 17, 2019 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Tim Palalino Re: Commercial Development ZMA-2019-00014 Review #1 Dear Mr. Palalino: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated 18 November 2019, and find it to be generally acceptable. Note that the final 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. If further information is desired, please contact Max Greene at 434-422-9894. 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 Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, IL" fl�l-tJ Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING